External validation of web-based calculator to predict cesarean delivery after induction of labor.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Malini Sukayogula, Maimoona Ahmed, Parthbhai Donga, Ananta Ghimire
{"title":"External validation of web-based calculator to predict cesarean delivery after induction of labor.","authors":"Malini Sukayogula, Maimoona Ahmed, Parthbhai Donga, Ananta Ghimire","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.70069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To externally validate a prediction model for the risk of a cesarean section after induction of labor (IOL) using a web-based cesarean risk calculator in a tertiary perinatal center and to compare the performance of three calculators in predicting the cesarean risk after IOL based on their sensitivity and specificity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective observational study of 577 women over a period of 1 year at a tertiary perinatal center in India. Women with singleton-term pregnancies with intact membranes that underwent induction were included. We used three prediction tools; Levine's, Rossi's and Irwinda's calculators for predicting cesarean rates. The variables were entered directly into the calculators at the start of IOL, producing an individualized risk of cesarean delivery. The mode of delivery was the primary outcome variable. Area under the ROC curve (AUC), calibration plots and decision making curve analysis were used for comparison.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 577 mothers who underwent IOL, 345 (59.79%) women had a vaginal birth and 232 (40.21%) underwent cesarean section. The Levine calculator reached the maximum discriminative capacity (AUC: 0.785) for our population, followed by Rossi (AUC: 0.7723) and Irwinda (AUC: 0.6608). Levine's calculator slightly overestimated the risk of cesarean section at lower thresholds but underestimated the risk at higher threshold probabilities whereas Rossi's calculator underestimated the risk of cesarean section at all threshold probabilities above 11%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Levine and Rossi calculators have the greatest potential for use in clinical settings. However, these cannot be used individually for clinical decision making without prospective studies evaluating their clinical impact on pregnant women undergoing IOL.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.70069","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To externally validate a prediction model for the risk of a cesarean section after induction of labor (IOL) using a web-based cesarean risk calculator in a tertiary perinatal center and to compare the performance of three calculators in predicting the cesarean risk after IOL based on their sensitivity and specificity.

Methods: This was a prospective observational study of 577 women over a period of 1 year at a tertiary perinatal center in India. Women with singleton-term pregnancies with intact membranes that underwent induction were included. We used three prediction tools; Levine's, Rossi's and Irwinda's calculators for predicting cesarean rates. The variables were entered directly into the calculators at the start of IOL, producing an individualized risk of cesarean delivery. The mode of delivery was the primary outcome variable. Area under the ROC curve (AUC), calibration plots and decision making curve analysis were used for comparison.

Results: Out of 577 mothers who underwent IOL, 345 (59.79%) women had a vaginal birth and 232 (40.21%) underwent cesarean section. The Levine calculator reached the maximum discriminative capacity (AUC: 0.785) for our population, followed by Rossi (AUC: 0.7723) and Irwinda (AUC: 0.6608). Levine's calculator slightly overestimated the risk of cesarean section at lower thresholds but underestimated the risk at higher threshold probabilities whereas Rossi's calculator underestimated the risk of cesarean section at all threshold probabilities above 11%.

Conclusion: The Levine and Rossi calculators have the greatest potential for use in clinical settings. However, these cannot be used individually for clinical decision making without prospective studies evaluating their clinical impact on pregnant women undergoing IOL.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
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