Evidence Hub

Machine learning approach to investigate pregnancy and childbirth risk factors of sleep problems in early adolescence: Evidence from two cohort studies

Ying Dai, A. Buttenheim, J. Pinto-Martin, Peggy Compton, Sara F. Jacoby, Jiang-Hong Liu

Comput. Methods Programs Biomed., 2024

848 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to predict early adolescent sleep problems using pregnancy and childbirth risk factors through machine learning algorithms, and to evaluate model performance internally and externally.

METHODS

Data from the China Jintan Child Cohort study (CJCC; n=848) for model development and the US Healthy Brain and Behavior Study (HBBS; n=454) for external validation were employed. Maternal pregnancy histories, obstetric data, and adolescent sleep problems were collected. Several machine learning techniques were employed, including least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, logistic regression, random forest, naïve bayes, extreme gradient boosting, decision tree, and neural network. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and root mean square of residuals were used to evaluate model performance.

RESULTS

Key predictors for CJCC adolescents' sleep problems include gestational age, birthweight, duration of delivery, and maternal happiness during pregnancy. In HBBS adolescents, the duration of postnatal depressive emotions was the primary perinatal predictor. The prediction models developed in the CJCC had good-to-excellent internal validation performance but poor performance in predicting the sleep problems in HBBS adolescents.

CONCLUSION

The identification of specific perinatal risk factors associated with adolescent sleep problems can inform targeted interventions during and after pregnancy to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 848 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free