Cargando…

Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome

OBJECTIVES: A mixture model of crown–rump length (CRL)-dependent and CRL-independent nuchal translucency (NT) measurements has been proposed for antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. We here compare the efficacy of the mixture model method with the standard method, which uses NT multiple of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bestwick, J P, Huttly, W J, Wald, N J
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal Society of Medicine Press 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3104819/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20356940
http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jms.2010.009108
_version_ 1782204645242830848
author Bestwick, J P
Huttly, W J
Wald, N J
author_facet Bestwick, J P
Huttly, W J
Wald, N J
author_sort Bestwick, J P
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: A mixture model of crown–rump length (CRL)-dependent and CRL-independent nuchal translucency (NT) measurements has been proposed for antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. We here compare the efficacy of the mixture model method with the standard method, which uses NT multiple of the median (MoM) values in a single distribution. SETTINGS: A routine antenatal screening programme for Down's syndrome comprising 104 affected and 22,284 unaffected pregnancies. METHODS: The ability of NT to distinguish between affected and unaffected pregnancies was compared using the mixture model method and the standard MoM method by using published distribution parameters for the mixture model of NT and parameters derived from these for the standard MoM method. The accuracy of the two methods was compared for NT and maternal age by comparing the median estimated risk with the prevalence of Down's syndrome in different categories of estimated risk. RESULTS: Using NT alone observed estimates of discrimination using the two methods are similar; at a 70% detection rate the false-positive rates were 12% using the mixture model method and 10% using the MoM method. Risk estimation was marginally (but not statistically significantly) more accurate using the standard MoM method. CONCLUSIONS: The mixture model method offers no advantage over the standard MoM method in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome, is more complicated and less generalizable to other data-sets. The standard MoM method remains the method of choice.
format Text
id pubmed-3104819
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Royal Society of Medicine Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31048192011-06-08 Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome Bestwick, J P Huttly, W J Wald, N J J Med Screen Original Articles OBJECTIVES: A mixture model of crown–rump length (CRL)-dependent and CRL-independent nuchal translucency (NT) measurements has been proposed for antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. We here compare the efficacy of the mixture model method with the standard method, which uses NT multiple of the median (MoM) values in a single distribution. SETTINGS: A routine antenatal screening programme for Down's syndrome comprising 104 affected and 22,284 unaffected pregnancies. METHODS: The ability of NT to distinguish between affected and unaffected pregnancies was compared using the mixture model method and the standard MoM method by using published distribution parameters for the mixture model of NT and parameters derived from these for the standard MoM method. The accuracy of the two methods was compared for NT and maternal age by comparing the median estimated risk with the prevalence of Down's syndrome in different categories of estimated risk. RESULTS: Using NT alone observed estimates of discrimination using the two methods are similar; at a 70% detection rate the false-positive rates were 12% using the mixture model method and 10% using the MoM method. Risk estimation was marginally (but not statistically significantly) more accurate using the standard MoM method. CONCLUSIONS: The mixture model method offers no advantage over the standard MoM method in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome, is more complicated and less generalizable to other data-sets. The standard MoM method remains the method of choice. Royal Society of Medicine Press 2010-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3104819/ /pubmed/20356940 http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jms.2010.009108 Text en Copyright http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Bestwick, J P
Huttly, W J
Wald, N J
Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome
title Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome
title_full Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome
title_fullStr Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome
title_short Evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome
title_sort evaluation of a proposed mixture model to specify the distributions of nuchal translucency measurements in antenatal screening for down's syndrome
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3104819/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20356940
http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jms.2010.009108
work_keys_str_mv AT bestwickjp evaluationofaproposedmixturemodeltospecifythedistributionsofnuchaltranslucencymeasurementsinantenatalscreeningfordownssyndrome
AT huttlywj evaluationofaproposedmixturemodeltospecifythedistributionsofnuchaltranslucencymeasurementsinantenatalscreeningfordownssyndrome
AT waldnj evaluationofaproposedmixturemodeltospecifythedistributionsofnuchaltranslucencymeasurementsinantenatalscreeningfordownssyndrome