| Literature DB >> 35831804 |
Sujatha Krishnamoorthy1, Yihang Liu2, Kun Liu3.
Abstract
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is an obstetric emergency instigated by excessive blood loss which occurs frequently after the delivery. The PPH can result in volume depletion, hypovolemic shock, and anemia. This is particular condition is considered a major cause of maternal deaths around the globe. Presently, physicians utilize visual examination for calculating blood and fluid loss during delivery. Since the classical methods depend on expert knowledge and are inaccurate, automated machine learning based PPH diagnosis models are essential. In regard to this aspect, this study introduces an efficient oppositional binary crow search algorithm (OBCSA) with an optimal stacked auto encoder (OSAE) model, called OBCSA-OSAE for PPH prediction. The goal of the proposed OBCSA-OSAE technique is to detect and classify the presence or absence of PPH. The OBCSA-OSAE technique involves the design of OBCSA based feature selection (FS) methods to elect an optimum feature subset. Additionally, the OSAE based classification model is developed to include an effective parameter adjustment process utilizing Equilibrium Optimizer (EO). The performance validation of the OBCSA-OSAE technique is performed using the benchmark dataset. The experimental values pointed out the benefits of the OBCSA-OSAE approach in recent methods.Entities:
Keywords: Classification; Feature Selection; Machine learning; Metaheuristics; Postpartum hemorrhage; Predictive model
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35831804 PMCID: PMC9281026 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-022-04775-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.105
Fig. 1Overall process of OBCSA-OSAE model
Fig. 2Structure of SAE
Best cost analysis of OBCSA-FS model
| Methods | No. of Selected Features | Best Cost |
|---|---|---|
| OBCSA-FS | 15 | 0.07462 |
| BCSA-FS | 24 | 0.08412 |
| EHO-FS | 36 | 0.09321 |
| GSO-FS | 40 | 0.09468 |
| ACO-FS | 48 | 0.09741 |
Fig. 3Best cost analysis of OBCSA-FS model
Fig. 4Confusion matrix of OBCSA-OSAE model with distinct runs
Result analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model with different measures
| No. of Runs | Precision | Recall | Accuracy | F-Score | MCC | Error Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run-1 | 0.9808 | 0.9212 | 0.9123 | 0.9500 | 0.6143 | 0.0877 |
| Run-2 | 0.9800 | 0.9346 | 0.9235 | 0.9568 | 0.6414 | 0.0765 |
| Run-3 | 0.9780 | 0.9498 | 0.9352 | 0.9637 | 0.6697 | 0.0648 |
| Run-4 | 0.9748 | 0.9558 | 0.9376 | 0.9652 | 0.6674 | 0.0624 |
| Run-5 | 0.9842 | 0.9546 | 0.9450 | 0.9692 | 0.7230 | 0.0550 |
| Run-6 | 0.9868 | 0.9438 | 0.9376 | 0.9648 | 0.7069 | 0.0624 |
| Run-7 | 0.9850 | 0.9563 | 0.9473 | 0.9704 | 0.7335 | 0.0527 |
| Run-8 | 0.9860 | 0.9568 | 0.9486 | 0.9712 | 0.7414 | 0.0514 |
| Run-9 | 0.9896 | 0.9548 | 0.9500 | 0.9719 | 0.7565 | 0.0500 |
| Run-10 | 0.9882 | 0.9531 | 0.9473 | 0.9704 | 0.7431 | 0.0527 |
| Average | 0.9833 | 0.9481 | 0.9384 | 0.9654 | 0.6997 | 0.0616 |
Fig. 5Result analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model with different runs
Fig. 6ROC analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model
Comparative analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model with existing methods in terms of different measures
| Methods | Accuracy | Recall | Precision | F-Score | MCC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RF | 0.912 | 0.747 | 0.937 | 0.830 | 0.630 |
| GBDT | 0.919 | 0.655 | 0.736 | 0.690 | 0.670 |
| XGB | 0.916 | 0.739 | 0.878 | 0.800 | 0.660 |
| SVM | 0.923 | 0.748 | 0.937 | 0.830 | 0.640 |
| EL-HC | 0.907 | 0.656 | 0.953 | 0.780 | 0.650 |
| EL-SC | 0.932 | 0.697 | 0.847 | 0.760 | 0.690 |
| OBCSA-OSAE | 0.938 | 0.948 | 0.983 | 0.965 | 0.700 |
Fig. 7Accuracy analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model with existing techniques
Fig. 8Comparative analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model with different measures
Fig. 9MCC analysis of OBCSA-OSAE model with existing approaches