Publicatie
Publicatie datum
External validation of prognostic models for preeclampsia in a Dutch multicenter prospective cohort.
Lamain-de Ruiter, M., Kwee, A., Naaktgeboren, C.A., Louhanepessy, R.D., Groot, I. de, Evers, I.M., Groenendaal, F., Hering, Y.R., Huisjes, A.J.M., Kirpestein, C., Monincx, W.M., Schielen, P.C.J.I., Zelfde, A. van't, Oirschot, C.M. van, Vankan-Buitelaar, S.A., Vonk, M.A.A.W., Wiegers, T.A., Zwart, J.J., Moons, K.G.M., Franx, A., Koster, M.P.H. External validation of prognostic models for preeclampsia in a Dutch multicenter prospective cohort. Hypertension in Pregnancy: 2019, 38(2), p. 78-88.
Lees online
Objective
To perform an external validation of all published prognostic models for first-trimester prediction of the risk of developing preeclampsia (PE).
Methods
Women <14 weeks of pregnancy were recruited in the Netherlands. All systematically identified prognostic models for PE that contained predictors commonly available were eligible for external validation.
Results
3,736 women were included; 87 (2.3%) developed PE. Calibration was poor due to overestimation. Discrimination of 9 models for LO-PE ranged from 0.58 to 0.71 and of 9 models for all PE from 0.55 to 0.75.
Conclusion
Only a few easily applicable prognostic models for all PE showed discrimination above 0.70, which is considered an acceptable performance.
To perform an external validation of all published prognostic models for first-trimester prediction of the risk of developing preeclampsia (PE).
Methods
Women <14 weeks of pregnancy were recruited in the Netherlands. All systematically identified prognostic models for PE that contained predictors commonly available were eligible for external validation.
Results
3,736 women were included; 87 (2.3%) developed PE. Calibration was poor due to overestimation. Discrimination of 9 models for LO-PE ranged from 0.58 to 0.71 and of 9 models for all PE from 0.55 to 0.75.
Conclusion
Only a few easily applicable prognostic models for all PE showed discrimination above 0.70, which is considered an acceptable performance.
Objective
To perform an external validation of all published prognostic models for first-trimester prediction of the risk of developing preeclampsia (PE).
Methods
Women <14 weeks of pregnancy were recruited in the Netherlands. All systematically identified prognostic models for PE that contained predictors commonly available were eligible for external validation.
Results
3,736 women were included; 87 (2.3%) developed PE. Calibration was poor due to overestimation. Discrimination of 9 models for LO-PE ranged from 0.58 to 0.71 and of 9 models for all PE from 0.55 to 0.75.
Conclusion
Only a few easily applicable prognostic models for all PE showed discrimination above 0.70, which is considered an acceptable performance.
To perform an external validation of all published prognostic models for first-trimester prediction of the risk of developing preeclampsia (PE).
Methods
Women <14 weeks of pregnancy were recruited in the Netherlands. All systematically identified prognostic models for PE that contained predictors commonly available were eligible for external validation.
Results
3,736 women were included; 87 (2.3%) developed PE. Calibration was poor due to overestimation. Discrimination of 9 models for LO-PE ranged from 0.58 to 0.71 and of 9 models for all PE from 0.55 to 0.75.
Conclusion
Only a few easily applicable prognostic models for all PE showed discrimination above 0.70, which is considered an acceptable performance.