| Autor: |
Meertens, Linda J.E., Scheepers, Hubertina C.J., van Kuijk, Sander M.J., Aardenburg, Robert, van Dooren, Ivo M.A., Langenveld, Josje, van Wijck, Annemieke M., Zwaan, Iris, Spaanderman, Marc E.A., Smits, Luc J.M., Meertens, Linda J E, Scheepers, Hubertina C J, van Kuijk, Sander M J, van Dooren, Ivo M A, van Wijck, Annemieke M, Spaanderman, Marc E A, Smits, Luc J M |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Fetal Diagnosis & Therapy; Jul2019, Vol. 45 Issue 6, p381-393, 13p |
| Abstrakt: |
Introduction: This study assessed the external validity of all published first trimester prediction models for the risk of preeclampsia (PE) based on routinely collected maternal predictors. Moreover, the potential utility of the best-performing models in clinical practice was evaluated.Material and Methods: Ten prediction models were systematically selected from the literature. We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study in the Netherlands between July 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015. Eligible pregnant women completed a web-based questionnaire before 16 weeks' gestation. The outcome PE was established using postpartum questionnaires and medical records. Predictive performance of each model was assessed by means of discrimination (c-statistic) and a calibration plot. Clinical usefulness was evaluated by means of decision curve analysis and by calculating the potential impact at different risk thresholds.Results: The validation cohort contained 2,614 women of whom 76 developed PE (2.9%). Five models showed moderate discriminative performance with c-statistics ranging from 0.73 to 0.77. Adequate calibration was obtained after refitting. The best models were clinically useful over a small range of predicted probabilities.Discussion: Five of the ten included first trimester prediction models for PE showed moderate predictive performance. The best models may provide more benefit compared to risk selection as used in current guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
