Cargando…

Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes

There is a strong association between social deprivation and adverse perinatal health outcomes, but related risk factors receive little attention in current antenatal risk selection. To increase awareness of healthcare professionals for these risk factors, a model for antenatal risk surveillance and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lagendijk, Jacqueline, Steyerberg, Ewout W., Daalderop, Leonie A., Been, Jasper V., Steegers, Eric A. P., Posthumus, Anke G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7347528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32647224
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68101-3
_version_ 1783556604483862528
author Lagendijk, Jacqueline
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Daalderop, Leonie A.
Been, Jasper V.
Steegers, Eric A. P.
Posthumus, Anke G.
author_facet Lagendijk, Jacqueline
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Daalderop, Leonie A.
Been, Jasper V.
Steegers, Eric A. P.
Posthumus, Anke G.
author_sort Lagendijk, Jacqueline
collection PubMed
description There is a strong association between social deprivation and adverse perinatal health outcomes, but related risk factors receive little attention in current antenatal risk selection. To increase awareness of healthcare professionals for these risk factors, a model for antenatal risk surveillance and care was developed in The Netherlands, called the ‘Rotterdam Reproductive Risk Reduction’ (R4U) scorecard. The aim of this study was to validate the R4U-scorecard. This study was conducted using external, prospective data from thirty-two midwifery practices, and fifteen hospitals in The Netherlands. The main outcome measures were the discrimination of the prognostic models for the probability of a pregnant woman developing adverse pregnancy outcomes (babies born preterm or small for gestational age), and calibration. We performed cross-validation and updated the model using statistical re-estimation of all predictors. 1752 participants were included, of whom 282 (16%) had one of the predefined adverse outcomes. The discriminative value of the original scoring system was poor [area under the curve (AUC) of 0.58 (95% CI 0.53–0.64)]. The model showed moderate calibration. The updated R4U-scorecard showed good generalisability to the validation set but did not alter the predictive value [AUC 0.61 (95% CI 0.56–0.66)]. By using external data and by updating the prognostic model, we have provided a comprehensive evaluation of the R4U-scorecard. Further improvement in classification of high-risk pregnancies is important considering the necessity of early risk detection for healthcare professionals to take appropriate actions to prevent these risks from becoming manifest problems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7347528
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73475282020-07-10 Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes Lagendijk, Jacqueline Steyerberg, Ewout W. Daalderop, Leonie A. Been, Jasper V. Steegers, Eric A. P. Posthumus, Anke G. Sci Rep Article There is a strong association between social deprivation and adverse perinatal health outcomes, but related risk factors receive little attention in current antenatal risk selection. To increase awareness of healthcare professionals for these risk factors, a model for antenatal risk surveillance and care was developed in The Netherlands, called the ‘Rotterdam Reproductive Risk Reduction’ (R4U) scorecard. The aim of this study was to validate the R4U-scorecard. This study was conducted using external, prospective data from thirty-two midwifery practices, and fifteen hospitals in The Netherlands. The main outcome measures were the discrimination of the prognostic models for the probability of a pregnant woman developing adverse pregnancy outcomes (babies born preterm or small for gestational age), and calibration. We performed cross-validation and updated the model using statistical re-estimation of all predictors. 1752 participants were included, of whom 282 (16%) had one of the predefined adverse outcomes. The discriminative value of the original scoring system was poor [area under the curve (AUC) of 0.58 (95% CI 0.53–0.64)]. The model showed moderate calibration. The updated R4U-scorecard showed good generalisability to the validation set but did not alter the predictive value [AUC 0.61 (95% CI 0.56–0.66)]. By using external data and by updating the prognostic model, we have provided a comprehensive evaluation of the R4U-scorecard. Further improvement in classification of high-risk pregnancies is important considering the necessity of early risk detection for healthcare professionals to take appropriate actions to prevent these risks from becoming manifest problems. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7347528/ /pubmed/32647224 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68101-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Lagendijk, Jacqueline
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Daalderop, Leonie A.
Been, Jasper V.
Steegers, Eric A. P.
Posthumus, Anke G.
Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
title Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
title_full Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
title_fullStr Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
title_short Validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
title_sort validation of a prognostic model for adverse perinatal health outcomes
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7347528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32647224
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68101-3
work_keys_str_mv AT lagendijkjacqueline validationofaprognosticmodelforadverseperinatalhealthoutcomes
AT steyerbergewoutw validationofaprognosticmodelforadverseperinatalhealthoutcomes
AT daalderopleoniea validationofaprognosticmodelforadverseperinatalhealthoutcomes
AT beenjasperv validationofaprognosticmodelforadverseperinatalhealthoutcomes
AT steegersericap validationofaprognosticmodelforadverseperinatalhealthoutcomes
AT posthumusankeg validationofaprognosticmodelforadverseperinatalhealthoutcomes