Back

Optimizing Screening for Intrauterine Fetal Growth Restriction in Low-Resource Settings Using 2D Ultrasound: A Deep Learning Approach

Enywaku, A.; Asiku, R. A.

2026-05-05 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.05.04.26352354 medRxiv
Show abstract

Severe fetal growth restriction (sFGR) affects 5 to 10% of pregnancies worldwide and is a major contributor to perinatal morbidity and mortality, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Traditional 2D ultrasound detection methods suffer from operator dependency, gestational age uncertainty, and limited access to Doppler in many low-resource facilities. This study presents a deep learning framework for sFGR screening and triage using 2D fetal abdominal ultrasound images designed to operate independently of precise gestational dating. Growth restriction severity labels were derived by mapping abdominal circumference measurements to INTERGROWTH-21st term percentiles as a gestational-age-normalized proxy for fetal size restriction when case-level gestational age or birth-weight data are unavailable. A systematic literature review of 37 studies revealed gaps in severity stratification and generalizability. We implemented a DenseNet-121-based model with abdominal circumference measurement for severity-aware classification using a retrospective single-center dataset of 1588 annotated fetal abdominal images from 169 term pregnancies. Patient-wise 3-fold cross-validation and ensemble testing yielded 93.7% accuracy, a weighted F1-score of 0.76, and ROC AUC [≥] 0.98 per class on heldout data. The approach outperforms previously reported single-center methods on this dataset while explicitly targeting LMIC-specific constraints. It demonstrates potential as a gestational-age-independent first-line triage layer for equitable prenatal screening, subject to prospective multi-site validation.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Placenta
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.1%
2
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.0%
4
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 7%
8.0%
5
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
8.0%
6
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.4%
8
BMC Medicine
176 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
9
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
10
Frontiers in Digital Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.8%
11
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
12
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
13
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
15
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.5%
16
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 23%
1.4%
17
Journal of Clinical Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
18
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
19
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
20
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.1%
22
Sensors
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
23
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 33%
0.9%
24
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
25
Medical Image Analysis
35 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
26
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
21 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
27
Imaging Neuroscience
282 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
28
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
29
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
38 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
30
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%