Predicting risk of maternal critical care admission in Scotland: Development of a risk prediction model.

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Lorna M Cowan, Imad Adamestam, John A Masterson, Monika Beatty, James P Boardman, Louis Chislett, Pamela Johnston, Judith Joss, Heather Lawrence, Kerry Litchfield, Nicholas Plummer, Stella Rhode, Timothy S Walsh, Arlene Wise, Rachael Wood, Christopher J Weir, Nazir I Lone
{"title":"Predicting risk of maternal critical care admission in Scotland: Development of a risk prediction model.","authors":"Lorna M Cowan, Imad Adamestam, John A Masterson, Monika Beatty, James P Boardman, Louis Chislett, Pamela Johnston, Judith Joss, Heather Lawrence, Kerry Litchfield, Nicholas Plummer, Stella Rhode, Timothy S Walsh, Arlene Wise, Rachael Wood, Christopher J Weir, Nazir I Lone","doi":"10.1177/17511437251313700","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Identifying women at highest or lowest risk of perinatal intensive care unit (ICU) admission may enable clinicians to risk stratify women antenatally so that enhanced care or elective admission to ICU may be considered or excluded in birthing plans. We aimed to develop a statistical model to predict the risk of maternal ICU admission.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We studied 762,918 pregnancies between 2005 and 2018. Predictive models were constructed using multivariable logistic regression. The primary outcome was ICU admission. Additional analyses were performed to allow inclusion of delivery-related factors. Predictors were selected following expert consultation and reviewing literature, resulting in 13 variables being included in the primary analysis: demographics, prior health status, obstetric history and pregnancy-related factors. A complete case analysis was performed. <i>K</i>-fold cross validation was used to mitigate against overfitting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Complete data were available for 578,310 pregnancies, of whom 1087 were admitted to ICU (0.19%). Model performance was fair (area under the ROC curve = 0.66). A comparatively high cut-point of ⩾0.6% for ICU admission risk resulted in a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.8% (specificity 97.8%) but positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.8% (sensitivity 9.1%). Models including delivery-related factors demonstrated superior discriminative performance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our model for maternal ICU admission has an acceptable discriminative performance. The low frequency of ICU admission and resulting low PPV indicates that the model would be unlikely to be useful as a 'rule-in' test for pre-emptive consideration of ICU admission. Its potential for improving efficiency in screening as a 'rule-out' test remains uncertain.</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":" ","pages":"17511437251313700"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11758435/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437251313700","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Identifying women at highest or lowest risk of perinatal intensive care unit (ICU) admission may enable clinicians to risk stratify women antenatally so that enhanced care or elective admission to ICU may be considered or excluded in birthing plans. We aimed to develop a statistical model to predict the risk of maternal ICU admission.

Methods: We studied 762,918 pregnancies between 2005 and 2018. Predictive models were constructed using multivariable logistic regression. The primary outcome was ICU admission. Additional analyses were performed to allow inclusion of delivery-related factors. Predictors were selected following expert consultation and reviewing literature, resulting in 13 variables being included in the primary analysis: demographics, prior health status, obstetric history and pregnancy-related factors. A complete case analysis was performed. K-fold cross validation was used to mitigate against overfitting.

Results: Complete data were available for 578,310 pregnancies, of whom 1087 were admitted to ICU (0.19%). Model performance was fair (area under the ROC curve = 0.66). A comparatively high cut-point of ⩾0.6% for ICU admission risk resulted in a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.8% (specificity 97.8%) but positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.8% (sensitivity 9.1%). Models including delivery-related factors demonstrated superior discriminative performance.

Conclusions: Our model for maternal ICU admission has an acceptable discriminative performance. The low frequency of ICU admission and resulting low PPV indicates that the model would be unlikely to be useful as a 'rule-in' test for pre-emptive consideration of ICU admission. Its potential for improving efficiency in screening as a 'rule-out' test remains uncertain.

预测苏格兰产妇重症监护入院风险:风险预测模型的建立。
背景:确定围产期重症监护病房(ICU)入住风险最高或最低的妇女可以使临床医生在产前对妇女进行风险分层,以便在分娩计划中考虑或排除加强护理或选择性入住ICU。我们的目的是建立一个统计模型来预测产妇进入ICU的风险。方法:我们研究了2005年至2018年期间762918例妊娠。采用多变量logistic回归构建预测模型。主要结局是ICU入院。进行了额外的分析,以便纳入与分娩有关的因素。在专家咨询和审查文献后,选择了预测因子,从而将13个变量纳入初步分析:人口统计学、既往健康状况、产科史和妊娠相关因素。进行了完整的病例分析。使用K-fold交叉验证来减轻过拟合。结果:578,310例妊娠获得完整资料,其中1087例入ICU(0.19%)。模型表现尚可(ROC曲线下面积= 0.66)。ICU入院风险的相对较高的切割点为小于或等于0.6%,导致阴性预测值(NPV)为99.8%(特异性97.8%),但阳性预测值(PPV)为0.8%(敏感性9.1%)。包含分娩相关因素的模型表现出优越的判别性能。结论:我们的产妇ICU入院模型具有可接受的判别性能。ICU入院的低频率和由此产生的低PPV表明,该模型不太可能作为预先考虑ICU入院的“规则”测试有用。作为一种“排除”测试,它在提高筛查效率方面的潜力仍不确定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Nursing-Critical Care Nursing
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信