Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 26 references

PUUMA (Placental patch and whole-Uterus dual-branch U-Mamba-based Architecture): Functional MRI Prediction of Gestational Age at Birth and Preterm Risk

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A fully automated MRI pipeline predicts gestational age at birth from T2* fetal MRI with about 3 weeks mean error, matching manual cervical-length regression for preterm detection.

desk verdict New application, honest proof-of-concept, but missing scan-age-only baseline leaves attribution of predictive signal to MRI unresolved. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07042 v1 pith:V4HFWE6J submitted 2025-09-08 eess.IV cs.LG

Diego Fajardo-Rojas , Levente Baljer , Jordina Aviles Verdera , Megan Hall , Daniel Cromb , Mary A. Rutherford , Lisa Story , Emma C. Robinson
show 1 more author
Jana Hutter
This is my paper
classification eess.IVcs.LG
keywords pretermbirthpredictionfetalMRIT2*relaxometryplacentalfunctiondeeplearningU-Mambagestationalageatcervicallength
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Preterm birth is hard to predict because its causes are many and poorly understood, and current clinical markers are operator-dependent or invasive. This paper tries to establish whether one safe, non-invasive measurement—T2* functional MRI of the placenta and uterus—can predict when a pregnancy will end. The authors build PUUMA, a dual-branch deep-learning model that reads the whole uterus at low resolution and the placenta at high resolution, and test it on 295 pregnancies with a deliberately imbalanced mix of term and preterm deliveries. On 26 held-out cases, PUUMA reached a mean absolute error of about 3 weeks in gestational age at birth and detected 67% of preterm births, the same sensitivity as a linear regression on cervical length measured manually from anatomical MRI. The paper presents this as proof of concept that automated MRI analysis can flag at-risk pregnancies and that MRI-derived cervical length is also informative, with implications for steroid timing and delivery planning.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is PUUMA's two-branch design built on U-Mamba, a U-Net whose encoder and decoder use Mamba state-space blocks to capture long-range dependencies. A global branch processes downsampled 128×128×64 whole-uterus T2* volumes and also predicts the placental segmentation mask; a local branch processes 16×16×16 high-resolution patches sampled from placental regions, requiring more than 33% placental tissue per patch. A fully connected layer concatenates both branch predictions with gestational age at scan and yields the final GA-at-birth regression and preterm classification. T2* maps come from mono-exponential fitting clipped at 300 ms, and placental masks are generated a

What would settle it

Take a held-out cohort with at least 30 preterm births and compare PUUMA's preterm sensitivity against a control model trained only on gestational age at scan, using the same architecture and loss. If the control matches or beats PUUMA's sensitivity and mean absolute error, the T2* imaging signal is not carrying the predictive information attributed to it; alternatively, if PUUMA's sensitivity on the larger cohort falls well below 0.5 while the scan-age-only model remains near chance, the original sensitivity was not a stable estimate.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that the functional state of the placenta and uterus, as encoded by T2* MRI, carries enough information about birth timing that a fully automated model can match a clinician's cervical length measurement. PUUMA fuses a global U-Mamba branch on whole-uterus volumes with a local U-Mamba encoder on 16×16×16 placental patches and combines both with gestational age at scan. On 26 test cases it reaches 3.05-week mean absolute error, 0.65 accuracy, and 0.67 sensitivity; cervical-length regression reaches 2.94 weeks and 0.67 sensitivity. PUUMA is the only model to predict both very preterm subjects as born before 34 weeks, whereas global-only U-Mamb

Load-bearing premise

The results stand on two linked premises: that a sensitivity of 0.67 measured on only six preterm births in the test set is a dependable estimate, and that the T2* placental and uterine signal adds predictive information beyond gestational age at scan, which the model receives as a direct input.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the test-set performance holds, a clinician could obtain a preterm-risk estimate from the same T2* acquisition already used to assess placental function—no extra scan, no manual contouring.
  • Because PUUMA's sensitivity for preterm detection (0.67) is double the global-branch U-Mamba's (0.33), local placental patches appear to carry signal that whole-uterus shape and topology do not.
  • MRI-derived cervical length could become a predictive marker in pregnancies where transvaginal ultrasound is unavailable or not desired.
  • A mean error near 3 weeks is in the range where the estimate could support decisions about antenatal corticosteroid timing and delivery at a centre with appropriate neonatal care.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct way to test whether T2* adds independent information is to compare PUUMA against a model that receives only gestational age at scan; if that baseline matches the reported MAE, the placental signal would not be carrying the prediction.
  • The paper does not fuse its two signal sources—automated T2* imaging and MRI cervical length—into a single predictor; combining them may yield higher sensitivity than either alone, and is a natural next experiment.
  • The same patch-plus-whole-organ design could transfer to other functional MRI contrasts, such as diffusion or T1, or to placental ultrasound, provided the local patch sampling survives resolution differences.
  • Because the cohort is enriched for high-risk pregnancies and excludes late scans, the reported error may be specific to this population; external cohorts with a more representative delivery mix would test the generalisability.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces PUUMA, a dual-branch U-Mamba-based architecture that predicts gestational age (GA) at birth and classifies preterm versus term birth from T2* whole-uterus fetal MRI and high-resolution placental patches. The model is trained on 295 pregnancies (after exclusions) and benchmarked against whole-uterus U-Mamba, a U-Net baseline, and linear regression on manual cervical length measurements. On a 26-subject test set containing 6 preterm births, PUUMA and the cervical-length regression achieve mean absolute errors of about 3 weeks and a preterm-detection sensitivity of 0.67, while whole-uterus U-Mamba alone reaches sensitivity 0.33. The authors frame the results as a proof of concept for automated functional MRI prediction of GA at birth and preterm risk, while acknowledging the small test set and class imbalance.

Significance. If the predictive contribution of placental and whole-uterus T2* signal were established, the work would be a useful step toward non-invasive MRI-based preterm-risk assessment, and the architectural design (global whole-uterus branch plus local placental patch branch) is reasonable and clearly described. The authors are also transparent about the imbalanced cohort and the small test set, and they benchmark against a clinically motivated cervical-length baseline. The main barrier to accepting the central claim is the unaddressed GA-at-scan confound: because GA at scan is provided as a direct model input and no scan-age-only baseline or ablation is reported, the observed performance cannot yet be attributed to T2* tissue properties. The manuscript would be strengthened by targeted experiments that isolate the imaging contribution.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.3, Figure 3] The final prediction layer concatenates gestational age at scan with the two branch outputs. No baseline using only GA at scan, and no ablation that removes the GA-at-scan input, is reported. In this cohort, scans are acquired before 37 weeks (Section 2.2) and GA at scan is necessarily strongly correlated with GA at birth, especially for preterm births that occur soon after the scan. A trivial model that outputs or thresholds scan GA could plausibly produce MAE in the 2–4 week range and, for preterm classification, could label most pre-37-week scans as preterm. Therefore the reported PUUMA performance (Table 2) does not currently support the mechanistic claim that functional placental/uterine T2* features contribute predictive information. Please add (a) a scan-age-only baseline, (b) an ablation of PUUMA without GA-at-scan input, and (c) a report of the scan-to-birth time distribution.
  2. [Section 3, Table 2] The central comparison rests on a test set of 26 subjects with only 6 preterm births. A sensitivity of 0.67 corresponds to 4 of 6 positives, with a wide 95% confidence interval (roughly 0.22–0.96). Differences in MAE (3.05 vs. 2.94 weeks) and sensitivity (0.67 vs. 0.33) between models are not assessed for statistical significance, and no confidence intervals or calibration curves are provided. Please report exact confusion matrices, bootstrap or exact binomial confidence intervals for sensitivity/specificity, and, where appropriate, paired tests for the primary comparisons. Without this, the claims of 'comparable' performance and 'good sensitivity' are not quantitatively supported.
  3. [Section 2.2, Section 2.4] Please clarify the patient-selection and baseline-fitting procedures. The sentence 'All fetal scans acquired after 37 weeks GA (term patients) were removed' is ambiguous: does it remove all term deliveries, or only scans acquired after 37 weeks while retaining term deliveries scanned earlier? This directly affects the correlation between scan GA and birth GA and the generalizability of the results. In addition, the cervical-length regression was fitted on 170 training cases; state whether the remaining 73 training cases lacked cervical-length measurements and whether the test set composition with respect to this baseline is comparable.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 1] Typographical errors: 'cortiscosteroid' should be 'corticosteroid' and 'pre-eclampisa' should be 'pre-eclampsia'.
  2. [Section 2.3] The patch-inclusion threshold of 33% placental tissue is a free parameter and is used both in training and at inference. Please report how sensitive the results are to this threshold and how many valid patch pairs are typically used per subject during sliding-window inference.
  3. [Section 3, Figure 4] The statement that PUUMA was the only model to predict both very preterm subjects as born before 34 weeks GA is based on visual inspection. Please report the point predictions for these two cases for all models.
  4. [Section 2.4, Table 2] Please specify how the regression output is converted to the binary preterm/term classification used for accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity (e.g., predicted GA < 37 weeks). This is important for interpreting the reported metrics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: PUUMA's predictions are not equivalent to its inputs; GA-at-scan is a legitimate input feature, though its confounding potential is a validity concern.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The model takes whole-uterus T2* volumes and placental patches, processes them through U-Mamba branches, and concatenates branch outputs with gestational age at scan before a final fully connected layer (Sect. 2.3, Fig. 3). GA at birth is not defined as or constructed to be equal to any input; the network must learn an offset from scan age. The cervical-length baseline is an ordinary linear regression fit on training data, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. No load-bearing self-citation: cited prior work (U-Mamba, nnU-Net, placental T2*) supplies architecture, segmentation tools, and background, not the paper's claimed predictive result. The absence of a scan-age-only ablation and the small 26-subject test set (6 preterm) are legitimate threats to the conclusion that T2* tissue properties carry the predictive signal, and the paper itself acknowledges the small test set limits generalisability (Sect. 4). But confounding and statistical power are not circularity: no equation in the paper reduces the predicted GA at birth to GA at scan or to any fitted parameter. Therefore score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; the ledger items are methodological and domain assumptions. The paper does not fit any free parameter to the test set in an explicitly reported way, but several choices (patch threshold, loss weights, architecture size) are hand-selected and underreported.

free parameters (3)
  • Patch inclusion threshold (33% placental tissue) = 0.33
    Chosen by hand; only patches overlapping with at least 33% of the placental mask are used (Section 2.3), affecting the input distribution.
  • Loss weights (MSE + Dice + BCE + CE) = not reported
    The final loss is a weighted sum (Section 2.3) but the individual weights are not specified in the paper, a hand-selected balancing choice.
  • Architecture hyperparameters (depths, latent dims) = Depth 3/6, latent 4096/5120
    These values (Table 1) are chosen by the authors and are not derived from any external benchmark for this task.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption T2* relaxometry reflects placental oxygenation and microstructure and thereby relates to birth timing
    The central rationale for using T2* data (Introduction, Section 2.3) is a field-level assumption that placental function is imaged by T2*, and that this function causally informs GA at birth.
  • domain assumption The nnU-Net placental segmentation masks are accurate enough for patch sampling
    Section 2.1: masks are automatically generated by a nnU-Net trained on expert annotations, but segmentation errors directly affect which patches are sampled and the global branch target.
  • domain assumption Manual cervical length from T2-weighted MRI approximates transvaginal ultrasound cervical length
    Section 2.4: MRI cervical length regression is used as a strong baseline benchmark, but its clinical equivalence to the standard ultrasound measurement is not established in the paper.
  • domain assumption U-Mamba (Mamba blocks in U-Net) is an appropriate inductive bias for 3D T2* volumes
    The architecture choice in Section 2.3 cites the U-Mamba segmentation paper [14], importing its claims about long-range dependency modeling without task-specific evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PUUMA (Placental patch and whole-Uterus dual-branch U-Mamba-based Architecture): Functional MRI Prediction of Gestational Age at Birth and Preterm Risk." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/V4HFWE6J

@misc{pith2026250907042,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PUUMA (Placental patch and whole-Uterus dual-branch U-Mamba-based Architecture): Functional MRI Prediction of Gestational Age at Birth and Preterm Risk},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/V4HFWE6J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07042}
}
read the original abstract

Preterm birth is a major cause of mortality and lifelong morbidity in childhood. Its complex and multifactorial origins limit the effectiveness of current clinical predictors and impede optimal care. In this study, a dual-branch deep learning architecture (PUUMA) was developed to predict gestational age (GA) at birth using T2* fetal MRI data from 295 pregnancies, encompassing a heterogeneous and imbalanced population. The model integrates both global whole-uterus and local placental features. Its performance was benchmarked against linear regression using cervical length measurements obtained by experienced clinicians from anatomical MRI and other Deep Learning architectures. The GA at birth predictions were assessed using mean absolute error. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were used to assess preterm classification. Both the fully automated MRI-based pipeline and the cervical length regression achieved comparable mean absolute errors (3 weeks) and good sensitivity (0.67) for detecting preterm birth, despite pronounced class imbalance in the dataset. These results provide a proof of concept for automated prediction of GA at birth from functional MRI, and underscore the value of whole-uterus functional imaging in identifying at-risk pregnancies. Additionally, we demonstrate that manual, high-definition cervical length measurements derived from MRI, not currently routine in clinical practice, offer valuable predictive information. Future work will focus on expanding the cohort size and incorporating additional organ-specific imaging to improve generalisability and predictive performance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07042 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example T2* MR images from the dataset, illustrating the heterogeneity of whole-uterus volumes (left column) and corresponding masked placentas (axial, coro￾nal, and sagittal views; center and right columns). Substantial variation is observed in placental size, shape, and positioning across subjects, reflecting the diversity and complexity of the study dataset. 2.2 Data Preprocessing All fetal scans acquired after 3… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Distribution of gestational age (GA) at scan (left) and at delivery (right) for all cases included in the study (n = 295). The majority of subjects delivered at term, with much smaller proportions in the extremely, very, and late preterm categories, highlighting the pronounced class imbalance present in the dataset. This imbalance poses significant challenges for preterm birth and GA at birth prediction. As illustra… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of the PUUMA (Placental patch and whole-Uterus dual-branch U￾Mamba-based Architecture) design for predicting gestational age (GA) at birth. The global branch (top) processes the whole-uterus T2* MRI volume using the U-Mamba encoder-decoder architecture to extract global features and predict placental segmen￾tation, as well as to perform regression and classification at the bottleneck. The local branch (bott… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Predicted versus true gestational age (GA) at birth for all test subjects, shown for each model. Points are colour-coded by preterm temporal category: term (blue), late preterm (red), very preterm (green), and extremely preterm (orange). Dashed black line indicates per…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

26 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Clinics in perinatology38, 441–54 (09 2011)

    Allen, M., Cristofalo, E., Kim, C.: Outcomes of preterm infants: Mor- bidity replaces mortality. Clinics in perinatology38, 441–54 (09 2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clp.2011.06.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.clp.2011.06.011 2011

  2. [2]

    JAMA pediatrics169(01 2015)

    Ancel, P.Y., Goffinet, F., Kuhn, P., Langer, B., Matis, J., Hernandorena, X., Cha- banier, P., Joly-Pedespan, L., Lecomte, B., Vendittelli, F., Dreyfus, M., Guillois, B., Burguet, A., Sagot, P., Sizun, J., Beuchée, A., Rouget, F., Favreau, A., Saliba, E., Kaminski, M.: Survival and morbidity of preterm children born at 22 through 34 weeks’ gestation in fr...

    work page arXiv 2011

  3. [3]

    Cells14(13) (2025)

    Cervantes, E.M., Girard, S.: Placental inflammation in preterm premature rupture of membranes and risk of neurodevelopmental disorders. Cells14(13) (2025). https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14130965, https://www.mdpi.com/2073- 4409/14/13/965

    work page doi:10.3390/cells14130965 2025

  4. [4]

    The BMJ345(2012)

    Costeloe, K.L., Hennessy, E.M., Haider, S., Stacey, F., Marlow, N., Draper, E.S.: Short term outcomes after extreme preterm birth in england: comparison of two birth cohorts in 1995 and 2006 (the epicure studies). The BMJ345(2012)

    work page 1995

  5. [5]

    Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine21(01 2016)

    Frey, H., Klebanoff, M.: The epidemiology, etiology, and costs of preterm birth. Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine21(01 2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2015.12.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.siny.2015.12.011 2016

  6. [6]

    Lancet371, 75–84 (02 2008)

    Goldenberg, R., Culhane, J., Iams, J., Romero, R.: Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet371, 75–84 (02 2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140- 6736(08)60074-4 PUUMA: Functional MRI Prediction of GA at Birth and Preterm Risk 11

    doi:10.1016/s0140- 2008

  7. [7]

    Gu, A., Dao, T.: Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces (2024), https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.00752

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Gu, A., Goel, K., Ré, C.: Efficiently modeling long sequences with structured state spaces (2022), https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.00396

    arXiv 2022

Show all 26 references
  1. [9]

    Cytokine & Growth Factor Reviews 78, 50–63 (2024)

    Habelrih, T., Augustin, T.L., Mauffette-Whyte, F., Ferri, B., Sawaya, K., Côté, F., Gallant, M., Olson, D.M., Chemtob, S.: Inflammatory mechanisms of preterm labor and emerging anti-inflammatory interventions. Cytokine & Growth Factor Reviews 78, 50–63 (2024). https://doi.org/...

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    (03 2024)

    Hall, M., Cromb, D., Neves Silva, S., Rutherford, M., Counsell, S., Ha- jnal, J., Story, L., Hutter, J.: Placental t2* as a measure of placental function across field strengths: Normal values from 0.55t to 3t. (03 2024). https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4125779/v1

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 81(2), 1191–1204 (2019)

    Hutter, J., Slator, P.J., Jackson, L., Gomes, A.D.S., Ho, A., Story, L., O’Muircheartaigh, J., Teixeira, R.P.A.G., Chappell, L.C., Alexander, D.C., Rutherford, M.A., Hajnal, J.V.: Multi-modal functional mri to ex- plore placental function over gestation. Magnetic Resonance in ...

    2019 doi

  4. [12]

    Nature methods18(2), 203—211 (February 2021)

    Isensee, F., Jaeger, P.F., Kohl, S.A.A., Petersen, J., Maier-Hein, K.H.: nnu-net: a self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation. Nature methods18(2), 203—211 (February 2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.08128

    2021 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Frontiers in ImmunologyVolume 5 - 2014(2014)

    Kemp, M.W.: Preterm birth, intrauterine infection, and fe- tal inflammation. Frontiers in ImmunologyVolume 5 - 2014(2014). https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2014.00574, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2014.00574

    2014

  6. [14]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04722 (2024)

    Ma, J., Li, F., Wang, B.: U-mamba: Enhancing long-range dependency for biomed- ical image segmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04722 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology110 Suppl 20, 30–3 (04 2003)

    Moutquin, J.M.: Classification and heterogeneity of preterm birth. BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology110 Suppl 20, 30–3 (04 2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-0328(03)00021-1

    2003 doi

  8. [16]

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/discontinuation-of-hologic-fetal- fibronectin-testing/ (2025), accessed: 2025-06-25

    NHS England: Discontinuation of hologic fetal fibronectin testing. https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/discontinuation-of-hologic-fetal- fibronectin-testing/ (2025), accessed: 2025-06-25

    2025

  9. [17]

    The Lancet402, 1261–1271 (10 2023)

    Ohuma, E., Moller, A.B., Bradley, E., Chakwera, S., Hussain-Alkhateeb, L., Lewin, A., Okwaraji, Y., Mahanani, W., Johansson, E., Lavin, T., Fernandez, D., Domínguez, G., Costa, A., Cresswell, J., Krasevec, J., Lawn, J., Blencowe, H., Requejo, J., Moran, A.: National, regional,...

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health6(11 2021)

    Perin, J., Mulick, A., Yeung, D., Villavicencio, F., Lopez, G., Strong, K., Prieto- Merino, D., Cousens, S., Black, R.: Global, regional, and national causes of under- 5 mortality in 2000–19: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the sustainable development goal...

    doi

  11. [19]

    581–588 (01 2019)

    Prema, N.S., Pushpalatha, M.: Machine Learning Approach for Preterm Birth Prediction Based on Maternal Chronic Conditions, pp. 581–588 (01 2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5802-9_52 12 D. Fajardo-Rojas et al

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    Archives of disease in childhood

    Santhakumaran, S., Statnikov, E., Gray, D., Battersby, C., Ashby, D., Modi, N.: Survival of very preterm infants admitted to neonatal care in england 2008-2014: time trends and regional variation. Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition103(09 2017). https:...

    2008 doi

  13. [21]

    European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology222(01 2018)

    Story, L., Hutter, J., Zhang, T., Shennan, A., Rutherford, M.: The use of antenatal fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of patients at high risk of preterm birth. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology222(01 2018). https://doi.org/1...

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurox.2019.100018

    Story, L., Simpson, N., David, A., Z, Z., Bennett, P., Jolly, M., Shennan, A.: Reducing the impact of preterm birth: Preterm birth commissioning in the united kingdom.EuropeanJournalofObstetrics&GynecologyandReproductiveBiology: X3(04 2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurox.2019.100018

    2019

  15. [23]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2018.09.006

    Suff, N., Story, L., Shennan, A.: The prediction of preterm delivery: What is new? Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine24(09 2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2018.09.006

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    Euro- pean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology271, 108–111 (2022)

    Suff, N., Xu, V.X., Glazewska-Hallin, A., Carter, J., Brennecke, S., Shen- nan, A.: Previous term emergency caesarean section is a risk factor for recurrent spontaneous preterm birth; a retrospective cohort study. Euro- pean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive ...

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    Schizophrenia Research247(05 2021)

    Vanes,L.,Murray,R.,Nosarti,C.:Adultoutcomeofpretermbirth:Implicationsfor neurodevelopmental theories of psychosis. Schizophrenia Research247(05 2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2021.04.007

    2021 doi

  18. [26]

    Wlodarczyk, T., Płotka, S., Trzcinski, T., Rokita, P., Sochacki-Wójcicka, N., Lipa, M., Wójcicki, J.: Estimation of preterm birth markers with u-net segmentation network (10 2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.