Prognostic prediction models for adverse birth outcomes: A systematic review

被引:0
|
作者
Muche, Achenef Asmamaw [1 ,2 ]
Baruda, Likelesh Lemma [1 ,3 ]
Pons-Duran, Clara [4 ]
Fite, Robera Olana [5 ]
Gelaye, Kassahun Alemu [5 ]
Yalew, Alemayehu Worku [6 ]
Tadesse, Lisanu [5 ]
Bekele, Delayehu [7 ]
Tolera, Getachew [8 ]
Chan, Grace J. [4 ,9 ]
Berhan, Yifru [7 ]
机构
[1] Ethiopian Publ Hlth Inst, Hlth Syst & Reprod Hlth Res Directorate, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[2] Univ Gondar, Inst Publ Hlth, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Maraki 196, Gondar, Ethiopia
[3] Fed Minist Hlth, Maternal & Child Hlth Directorate, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[4] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Boston, MA USA
[5] HaSET Maternal & Child Hlth Res Program, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[6] Addis Ababa Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[7] St Pauls Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Millennium Med Coll, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[8] Ethiopian Publ Hlth Inst, Deputy Director Gen Off Res & Technol Transfer Dir, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[9] Harvard Med Sch, Boston Childrens Hosp, Dept Paediat, Boston, MA USA
基金
比尔及梅琳达.盖茨基金会;
关键词
HEALTH-CARE; RISK; CHALLENGES;
D O I
10.7189/jogh.14.04214
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background Despite progress in reducing maternal and child mortality worldwide, adverse birth outcomes such as preterm birth, low birth weight (LBW), small for gestational age (SGA), and stillbirth continue to be a major global health challenge. Developing a prediction model for adverse birth outcomes allows for early risk detection and prevention strategies. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the performance of existing prediction models for adverse birth outcomes and provide a comprehensive summary of their findings. Methods We used the Population, Index prediction model, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, and Setting (PICOTS) approach to retrieve published studies from PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, African Journals Online, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. We used WorldCat, Google, and Google Scholar to find the grey literature. We retrieved data before 1 March 2022. Data were extracted using CHecklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies. We assessed the risk of bias with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment tool. We descriptively reported the results in tables and graphs. Results We included 115 prediction models with the following outcomes: composite adverse birth outcomes (n = 6), LBW (n = 17), SGA (n = 23), preterm birth (n = 71), and stillbirth (n = 9). The sample sizes ranged from composite adverse birth outcomes (n = 32-549), LBW (n = 97-27 233), SGA (n = 41-116070), preterm birth (n = 31-15883 784), and stillbirth (n =180- 76 629). Only nine studies were conducted on low- and middle-income countries. 10 studies were externally validated. Risk of bias varied across studies, in which high risk of bias was reported on prediction models for SGA (26.1%), stillbirth (77.8%), preterm birth (31%), LBW (23.5%), and composite adverse birth outcome (33.3%). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) was the most used metric to describe model performance. The AUROC ranged from 0.51 to 0.83 in studies that reported predictive performance for preterm birth. The AUROC for predicting SGA, LBW, and stillbirth varied from 0.54 to 0.81, 0.60 to 0.84, and 0.65 to 0.72, respectively. Maternal clinical features were the most utilised prognostic markers for preterm and LBW prediction, while uterine artery pulsatility index was used for stillbirth and SGA prediction. Conclusions A varied prognostic factors and heterogeneity between studies were found to predict adverse birth outcomes. Prediction models using consistent prognostic factors, external validation, and adaptation of future risk prediction models for adverse birth outcomes was recommended at different settings. Registration PROSPERO CRD42021281725.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Wildfire exposure during pregnancy and the risk of adverse birth outcomes: A systematic review
    Amjad, Sana
    Chojecki, Dagmara
    Osornio-Vargas, Alvaro
    Ospina, Maria B.
    ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 156
  • [22] Prediction models of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: A systematic review
    Deng, Bo
    Li, Yan
    Chen, Jia-Yin
    Guo, Jun
    Tan, Jing
    Yang, Yang
    Liu, Ning
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2022, 135
  • [23] Prognostic factors and prediction models for acute aortic dissection: a systematic review
    Ren, Yan
    Huang, Shiyao
    Li, Qianrui
    Liu, Chunrong
    Li, Ling
    Tan, Jing
    Zou, Kang
    Sun, Xin
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (02):
  • [24] Prognostic prediction models for chronic postsurgical pain in adults: a systematic review
    Papadomanolakis-Pakis, Nicholas
    Uhrbrand, Peter
    Haroutounian, Simon
    Nikolajsen, Lone
    PAIN, 2021, 162 (11) : 2644 - 2657
  • [25] Use of unstructured text in prognostic clinical prediction models: a systematic review
    Seinen, Tom M.
    Fridgeirsson, Egill A.
    Ioannou, Solomon
    Jeannetot, Daniel
    John, Luis H.
    Kors, Jan A.
    Markus, Aniek F.
    Pera, Victor
    Rekkas, Alexandros
    Williams, Ross D.
    Yang, Cynthia
    van Mulligen, Erik M.
    Rijnbeek, Peter R.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2022, : 1292 - 1302
  • [26] Preconception exposures and adverse pregnancy, birth and postpartum outcomes: Umbrella review of systematic reviews
    Daly, Michael
    Kipping, Ruth R.
    Tinner, Laura E.
    Sanders, Julia
    White, James W.
    PAEDIATRIC AND PERINATAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 36 (02) : 288 - 299
  • [27] Racial residential segregation and adverse birth outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Mehra, Renee
    Boyd, Lisa M.
    Ickovics, Jeannette R.
    SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2017, 191 : 237 - 250
  • [28] Maternal Eating Disorders and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Milembamane, Mantala
    Moussa, Nadin M.
    Twynstra, Jasna
    Seabrook, Jamie A.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF DIETETIC PRACTICE AND RESEARCH, 2024, 85 (01) : 45 - 53
  • [29] Biomarkers and the Prediction of Adverse Outcomes in Preeclampsia A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Lim, Sean
    Li, Wentao
    Kemper, Jessica
    Nguyen, Andrew
    Mol, Ben Willem
    Reddy, Maya
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2021, 137 (01): : 72 - 81
  • [30] BNP and NT-proBNP as prognostic biomarkers for the prediction of adverse outcomes in HFpEF patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ammar, Lama A.
    Massoud, Gaelle P.
    Chidiac, Charbel
    Booz, George W.
    Altara, Raffaele
    Zouein, Fouad A.
    HEART FAILURE REVIEWS, 2025, 30 (01) : 45 - 54