Development and validation of a prognostic model to predict birth weight: individual participant data meta-analysis

Author:

Allotey JohnORCID,Archer Lucinda,Snell Kym I EORCID,Coomar Dyuti,Massé Jacques,Sletner Line,Wolf Hans,Daskalakis George,Saito Shigeru,Ganzevoort Wessel,Ohkuchi Akihide,Mistry HemaORCID,Farrar Diane,Mone Fionnuala,Zhang Jun,Seed Paul T,Teede Helena,Da Silva Costa Fabricio,Souka Athena P,Smuk Melanie,Ferrazzani Sergio,Salvi Silvia,Prefumo FedericoORCID,Gabbay-Benziv Rinat,Nagata Chie,Takeda Satoru,Sequeira Evan,Lapaire Olav,Cecatti Jose Guilherme,Morris Rachel KatherineORCID,Baschat Ahmet A,Salvesen Kjell,Smits Luc,Anggraini Dewi,Rumbold Alice,van Gelder MarleenORCID,Coomarasamy Arri,Kingdom John,Heinonen Seppo,Khalil AsmaORCID,Goffinet François,Haqnawaz Sadia,Zamora Javier,Riley Richard DORCID,Thangaratinam Shakila

Abstract

ObjectiveTo predict birth weight at various potential gestational ages of delivery based on data routinely available at the first antenatal visit.DesignIndividual participant data meta-analysis.Data sourcesIndividual participant data of four cohorts (237 228 pregnancies) from the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications (IPPIC) network dataset.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies in the IPPIC network were identified by searching major databases for studies reporting risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as pre-eclampsia, fetal growth restriction, and stillbirth, from database inception to August 2019. Data of four IPPIC cohorts (237 228 pregnancies) from the US (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2018; 233 483 pregnancies), UK (Allen et al, 2017; 1045 pregnancies), Norway (STORK Groruddalen research programme, 2010; 823 pregnancies), and Australia (Rumbold et al, 2006; 1877 pregnancies) were included in the development of the model.ResultsThe IPPIC birth weight model was developed with random intercept regression models with backward elimination for variable selection. Internal-external cross validation was performed to assess the study specific and pooled performance of the model, reported as calibration slope, calibration-in-the-large, and observed versus expected average birth weight ratio. Meta-analysis showed that the apparent performance of the model had good calibration (calibration slope 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.10; calibration-in-the-large 44.5 g, −18.4 to 107.3) with an observed versus expected average birth weight ratio of 1.02 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.07). The proportion of variation in birth weight explained by the model (R2) was 46.9% (range 32.7-56.1% in each cohort). On internal-external cross validation, the model showed good calibration and predictive performance when validated in three cohorts with a calibration slope of 0.90 (Allen cohort), 1.04 (STORK Groruddalen cohort), and 1.07 (Rumbold cohort), calibration-in-the-large of −22.3 g (Allen cohort), −33.42 (Rumbold cohort), and 86.4 g (STORK Groruddalen cohort), and observed versus expected ratio of 0.99 (Rumbold cohort), 1.00 (Allen cohort), and 1.03 (STORK Groruddalen cohort); respective pooled estimates were 1.00 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.23; calibration slope), 9.7 g (−154.3 to 173.8; calibration-in-the-large), and 1.00 (0.94 to 1.07; observedvexpected ratio). The model predictions were more accurate (smaller mean square error) in the lower end of predicted birth weight, which is important in informing clinical decision making.ConclusionsThe IPPIC birth weight model allowed birth weight predictions for a range of possible gestational ages. The model explained about 50% of individual variation in birth weights, was well calibrated (especially in babies at high risk of fetal growth restriction and its complications), and showed promising performance in four different populations included in the individual participant data meta-analysis. Further research to examine the generalisability of performance in other countries, settings, and subgroups is required.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42019135045

Funder

Health Technology Assessment Programme

Publisher

BMJ

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3