Prognostic Models Predicting Mortality in Preterm Infants: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Author:

van Beek Pauline E.1,Andriessen Peter12,Onland Wes3,Schuit Ewoud45

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, Netherlands;

2. Department of Applied Physics, School of Medical Physics and Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands;

3. Department of Neonatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands;

4. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; and

5. Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands

Abstract

CONTEXT: Prediction models can be a valuable tool in performing risk assessment of mortality in preterm infants. OBJECTIVE: Summarizing prognostic models for predicting mortality in very preterm infants and assessing their quality. DATA SOURCES: Medline was searched for all articles (up to June 2020). STUDY SELECTION: All developed or externally validated prognostic models for mortality prediction in liveborn infants born <32 weeks’ gestation and/or <1500 g birth weight were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by 2 independent authors. Risk of bias (ROB) and applicability assessment was performed by 2 independent authors using Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two models from 35 studies reporting on model development and 112 models from 33 studies reporting on external validation were included. ROB assessment revealed high ROB in the majority of the models, most often because of inadequate (reporting of) analysis. Internal and external validation was lacking in 41% and 96% of these models. Meta-analyses revealed an average C-statistic of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83–0.91) for the Clinical Risk Index for Babies score, 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81–0.92) for the Clinical Risk Index for Babies II score, and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.78–0.92) for the Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology Perinatal Extension II score. LIMITATIONS: Occasionally, an external validation study was included, but not the development study, because studies developed in the presurfactant era or general NICU population were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Instead of developing additional mortality prediction models for preterm infants, the emphasis should be shifted toward external validation and consecutive adaption of the existing prediction models.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

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