{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]],"date-time":"2026-01-12T11:23:07Z","timestamp":1768216987306,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":31,"publisher":"Frontiers Media SA","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]],"date-time":"2026-01-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1768176000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["frontiersin.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Front. Artif. Intell."],"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Accurate antenatal prediction of SGA at birth is essential to improve development and delivery of preventative and therapeutic interventions. This study aimed to assess the performance of machine learning (ML) models to predict SGA at birth among Chinese pregnancies classified according to the Chinese birthweight standard and three international birthweight standards.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We collected multimodal, longitudinal, antenatal surveillance data on 350,135 singleton pregnancies in Wenzhou City, China, between Jan 1, 2014 and Dec 31, 2016. For three pregnancy intervals we developed ML prediction models for newborns classified as SGA using the China, Intergrowth 21st, Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF), and Gestation-related Optimal Weight (GROW) standards. We applied lasso regression to conduct feature selection, and CatBoost, XGBoost, LightBoost, Artificial Neural Networks, Random Forest, Stacked ensemble model, and logistic regression for predictive modeling in training data sets, with validation in testing data sets.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Among 22,603 singleton pregnancies with complete data, the rate of SGA using the China standard was 6.1%, compared to 4.3, 6.0, and 9.7% for the Intergrowth 21st, GROW, and FMF standards, respectively. This pattern was maintained in the imputed data set (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u202f=\u202f225,523), with corresponding SGA rates of 6.8, 4.8, 7.4, and 10.7%. Late pregnancy models (&amp;lt;37\u202fweeks) had the best power to predict SGA, compared to middle (&amp;lt;26\u202fweeks) and early pregnancy (&amp;lt;18\u202fweeks) models. With the China standard, the logistic regression model in late pregnancy performed best with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.74. Logistic regression also performed better than ML algorithms with the Intergrowth-21st and GROW standards at each pregnancy interval, although differences were small. The Random Forest model with the FMF standard achieved superior performance at each pregnancy interval, reaching a ROC-AUC of 0.79 in late pregnancy. Notably, the middle pregnancy Random Forest model with the FMF standard already attained a ROC-AUC of 0.72 at 26\u202fweeks\u2019 gestation. Symphysis-fundal height, maternal abdominal circumference, maternal age, maternal height and weight, and parity were consistently identified as key predictors of SGA across the different standards.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>There are important differences in the classification of SGA at birth between national and international birthweight standards. Both machine learning models and traditional logistic regression demonstrated comparable predictive performance for SGA identification. These findings hold promise for guiding risk-stratified prenatal care and optimizing resource allocation in clinical settings.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.3389\/frai.2025.1679979","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]],"date-time":"2026-01-12T08:11:18Z","timestamp":1768205478000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Antenatal prediction of small for gestational age at birth based on four birthweight standards using machine learning algorithms"],"prefix":"10.3389","volume":"8","author":[{"given":"Qiu-Yan","family":"Yu","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Ying","family":"Lin","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Yu-Run","family":"Zhou","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Xin-Jun","family":"Yang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Joris","family":"Hemelaar","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"1965","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e65-e90","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004479","article-title":"Prediction and prevention of spontaneous preterm birth: ACOG practice bulletin, number 234","volume":"138","year":"2021","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"550","DOI":"10.3390\/jpm12040550","article-title":"Development and evaluation of a machine learning prediction model for small-for-gestational-age births in women exposed to radiation before pregnancy","volume":"12","author":"Bai","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Pers Med"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"940182","DOI":"10.3389\/fpubh.2022.940182","article-title":"Predictive models for small-for-gestational-age births in women exposed to pesticides before pregnancy based on multiple machine learning algorithms","volume":"10","author":"Bai","year":"2022","journal-title":"Front. Public Health"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"738","DOI":"10.3760\/cma.j.cn112140-20200316-00242","article-title":"Growth standard curves of birth weight, length and head circumference of Chinese newborns of different gestation","volume":"58","year":"2020","journal-title":"Zhonghua Er Ke Za Zhi"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"12119","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-022-16234-y","article-title":"Machine learning-based risk factor analysis of adverse birth outcomes in very low birth weight infants","volume":"12","author":"Cho","year":"2022","journal-title":"Sci. Rep."},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"264","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.22151","article-title":"Performance of six birth-weight and estimated-fetal-weight standards\u202ffor\u202fpredicting\u202fadverse\u202fperinatal\u202foutcome: a 10-year nationwide population-based study","volume":"58","author":"Choi","year":"2021","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"12","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2019.02.004","article-title":"A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models","volume":"110","author":"Christodoulou","year":"2019","journal-title":"J. Clin. Epidemiol."},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"270","DOI":"10.1186\/s12859-018-2264-5","article-title":"Random forest versus logistic regression: a large-scale benchmark experiment","volume":"19","author":"Couronn\u00e9","year":"2018","journal-title":"BMC Bioinformatics"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1920","DOI":"10.1161\/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.001593","article-title":"Machine learning in medicine","volume":"132","author":"Deo","year":"2015","journal-title":"Circulation"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"136","DOI":"10.1186\/s12884-022-04450-3","article-title":"INTERGROWTH-21st versus a customized method for the prediction of neonatal nutritional status in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy","volume":"22","author":"Fern\u00e1ndez-Alba","year":"2022","journal-title":"BMC Pregnancy Childbirth"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"S609","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.12.011","article-title":"Customized growth charts: rationale, validation and clinical benefits","volume":"218","author":"Gardosi","year":"2018","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"870","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(21)01207-1","article-title":"Global, regional, and national progress towards sustainable development goal 3.2 for neonatal and child health: all-cause and cause-specific mortality findings from the global burden of disease study 2019","volume":"398","year":"2021","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"S641-S655.e28","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.11.593","article-title":"Fetal growth standards: the NICHD fetal growth study approach in context with INTERGROWTH-21st and the World Health Organization multicentre growth reference study","volume":"218","author":"Grantz","year":"2018","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1211","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMra2212850","article-title":"Where medical statistics meets artificial intelligence","volume":"389","author":"Hunter","year":"2023","journal-title":"N. Engl. J. Med."},{"key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.20299","article-title":"Prediction of adverse perinatal outcome by fetal biometry: comparison of customized and population-based standards","volume":"55","author":"Kabiri","year":"2020","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e1002220","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1002220","article-title":"The World Health Organization fetal growth charts: a multinational longitudinal study of ultrasound biometric measurements and estimated fetal weight","volume":"14","author":"Kiserud","year":"2017","journal-title":"PLoS Med."},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"333","DOI":"10.1186\/s12884-018-1971-2","article-title":"Comparison of logistic regression with machine learning methods for the prediction of fetal growth abnormalities: a retrospective cohort study","volume":"18","author":"Kuhle","year":"2018","journal-title":"BMC Pregnancy Childbirth"},{"key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e26","DOI":"10.1016\/S2214-109X(13)70006-8","article-title":"National and regional estimates of term and preterm babies born small for gestational age in 138 low-income and middle-income countries in 2010","volume":"1","author":"Lee","year":"2013","journal-title":"Lancet Glob. Health"},{"key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"j3677","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.j3677","article-title":"Estimates of burden and consequences of infants born small for gestational age in low and middle income countries with INTERGROWTH-21(st) standard: analysis of CHERG datasets","volume":"358","author":"Lee","year":"2017","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3027","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(16)31593-8","article-title":"Global, regional, and national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000-15: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the sustainable development goals","volume":"388","author":"Liu","year":"2016","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1130139","DOI":"10.3389\/fendo.2023.1130139","article-title":"Machine learning applied in maternal and fetal health: a narrative review focused on pregnancy diseases and complications","volume":"14","author":"Mennickent","year":"2023","journal-title":"Front. Endocrinol. (Lausanne)"},{"key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"459","DOI":"10.1007\/s10654-018-0390-z","article-title":"Stacked generalization: an introduction to super learning","volume":"33","author":"Naimi","year":"2018","journal-title":"Eur. J. Epidemiol."},{"key":"ref23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.19073","article-title":"Fetal medicine foundation fetal and neonatal population weight charts","volume":"52","author":"Nicolaides","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1381","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.13394","article-title":"Customized fetal growth standard compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st century standard at predicting small-for-gestational-age neonates","volume":"97","author":"Odibo","year":"2018","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"ref25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"17455065211046132","DOI":"10.1177\/17455065211046132","article-title":"Perinatal health predictors using artificial intelligence: a review","volume":"17","author":"Ramakrishnan","year":"2021","journal-title":"Womens Health (Lond)"},{"key":"ref26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"206","DOI":"10.1038\/s42256-019-0048-x","article-title":"Stop explaining Black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead","volume":"1","author":"Rudin","year":"2019","journal-title":"Nat Mach Intell"},{"key":"ref27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"984","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm10132984","article-title":"Prediction of late-onset small for gestational age and fetal growth restriction by fetal biometry at 35 weeks and impact of ultrasound-delivery interval: comparison of six fetal growth standards","volume":"10","author":"Savir\u00f3n-Cornudella","year":"2021","journal-title":"J. Clin. Med."},{"key":"ref28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e195","DOI":"10.1016\/S2214-109X(21)00515-5","article-title":"Global, regional, and national trends in under-5 mortality between 1990 and 2019 with scenario-based projections until 2030: a systematic analysis by the UN inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation","volume":"10","author":"Sharrow","year":"2022","journal-title":"Lancet Glob. Health"},{"key":"ref29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1009","DOI":"10.3390\/diagnostics12041009","article-title":"Use of a feed-forward Back propagation network for the prediction of small for gestational age newborns in a cohort of pregnant patients with thrombophilia","volume":"12","author":"Vicoveanu","year":"2022","journal-title":"Diagnostics (Basel)"},{"key":"ref30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"857","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(14)60932-6","article-title":"International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the newborn cross-sectional study of the INTERGROWTH-21st project","volume":"384","author":"Villar","year":"2014","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"474","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2007.01273.x","article-title":"The use of customised versus population-based birthweight standards in predicting perinatal mortality","volume":"114","author":"Zhang","year":"2007","journal-title":"BJOG"}],"container-title":["Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2025.1679979\/full","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]],"date-time":"2026-01-12T08:11:20Z","timestamp":1768205480000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2025.1679979\/full"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]]},"references-count":31,"alternative-id":["10.3389\/frai.2025.1679979"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/frai.2025.1679979","relation":{},"ISSN":["2624-8212"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2624-8212","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,12]]},"article-number":"1679979"}}