Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

External validation of prognostic models for preeclampsia in a Dutch multicenter prospective cohort

  • Marije Lamain-de Ruiter
  • , Anneke Kwee
  • , Christiana A Naaktgeboren
  • , Rebecca D Louhanepessy
  • , Inge De Groot
  • , Inge M Evers
  • , Floris Groenendaal
  • , Yolanda R Hering
  • , Anjoke J M Huisjes
  • , Cornel Kirpestein
  • , Wilma M Monincx
  • , Peter C J I Schielen
  • , Annewil Van 't Zelfde
  • , Charlotte M Van Oirschot
  • , Simone A Vankan-Buitelaar
  • , Mariska A A W Vonk
  • , Therese A Wiegers
  • , Joost J Zwart
  • , Karel G M Moons
  • , Arie Franx
  • Maria P H Koster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)78-88
Number of pages11
JournalHypertension in Pregnancy
Volume38
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20 Mar 2019

Keywords

  • First trimester
  • external validation
  • preeclampsia
  • prognostic model
  • Models, Theoretical
  • Prognosis
  • Prospective Studies
  • Risk Assessment
  • Humans
  • Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis
  • Pregnancy
  • Adult
  • Female

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'External validation of prognostic models for preeclampsia in a Dutch multicenter prospective cohort'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this