Literature DB >> 21493154

Templeton prediction model underestimates IVF success in an external validation.

L L van Loendersloot1, M van Wely, S Repping, F van der Veen, P M M Bossuyt.   

Abstract

Prediction models for IVF can be used to identify couples that will benefit from IVF treatment. Currently there is only one prediction model with a good predictive performance that can be used for predicting pregnancy chances after IVF. That model was developed almost 15 years ago and since IVF has progressed substantially during the last two decades it is questionable whether the model is still valid in current clinical practice. The objective of this study was to validate the prediction model of Templeton for calculating pregnancy chances after IVF. The performance of the prediction model was assessed in terms of discrimination, i.e. the area under the receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration. Likely causes for miscalibration were evaluated by refitting the Templeton model to the study data. The area under the ROC curve for the Templeton model was 0.61. Calibration showed a significant and systematic underestimation of success in IVF. Although the Templeton model can distinguish somewhat between women with a high and low success rate in IVF, it systematically underestimates pregnancy chances and has therefore no real value for current IVF practice.
Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21493154     DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.02.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online        ISSN: 1472-6483            Impact factor:   3.828


  7 in total

1.  To what extent does Anti-Mullerian Hormone contribute to a better prediction of live birth after IVF?

Authors:  Catherine Rongieres; Carolina Colella; Philippe Lehert
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Can Ratios Between Prognostic Factors Predict the Clinical Pregnancy Rate in an IVF/ICSI Program with a GnRH Agonist-FSH/hMG Protocol? An Assessment of 2421 Embryo Transfers, and a Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Philippe Merviel; Michel Menard; Rosalie Cabry; Florence Scheffler; Emmanuelle Lourdel; Marie-Thérèse Le Martelot; Sylvie Roche; Jean-Jacques Chabaud; Henri Copin; Hortense Drapier; Moncef Benkhalifa; Damien Beauvillard
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-09-04       Impact factor: 3.060

3.  External validation and calibration of IVFpredict: a national prospective cohort study of 130,960 in vitro fertilisation cycles.

Authors:  Andrew D A C Smith; Kate Tilling; Debbie A Lawlor; Scott M Nelson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Prediction models in in vitro fertilization; where are we? A mini review.

Authors:  Laura van Loendersloot; S Repping; P M M Bossuyt; F van der Veen; M van Wely
Journal:  J Adv Res       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 10.479

5.  Predicting the chance on live birth per cycle at each step of the IVF journey: external validation and update of the van Loendersloot multivariable prognostic model.

Authors:  Johanna Devroe; Karen Peeraer; Geert Verbeke; Carl Spiessens; Joris Vriens; Eline Dancet
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Predicting live birth chances for women with multiple consecutive failing IVF cycles: a simple and accurate prediction for routine medical practice.

Authors:  Géraldine Porcu; Philippe Lehert; Carolina Colella; Claude Giorgetti
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 5.211

7.  Factors associated with failed treatment: an analysis of 121,744 women embarking on their first IVF cycles.

Authors:  Siladitya Bhattacharya; Abha Maheshwari; Jill Mollison
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.