Literature DB >> 2653336

An evaluation of formal risk scoring for preterm birth.

M J Keirse1.   

Abstract

Formal risk scoring systems for the prediction of preterm birth lack many of the characteristics that are required from effective screening tests. They show poor positive predictive values, poor reproducibility, and large differences in performance among different populations. In clinical practice the implementation of these scoring systems has not shown to confer more benefit than harm to the women and infants involved. There is no conclusive evidence for reduction of the incidence of preterm birth, especially among women considered to be at high risk on the basis of such scores. The use of these scores has led to a profusion of interventions being applied to women without demonstrable benefit for them from these interventions. The introduction of formal risk scoring for preterm birth thus profoundly alters the type of care available to pregnant women. The main effect thus far appears to be that a potential but relatively imprecise risk of preterm birth tends to be replaced by the certain risk of dubious treatments, whose merits are undocumented and whose hazards are unknown. There is great need for controlled studies to establish whether and for whom potential benefits of formal risk scoring can outweigh its hazards.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2653336     DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-999582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Perinatol        ISSN: 0735-1631            Impact factor:   1.862


  3 in total

Review 1.  Premature labour.

Authors:  P J Steer
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Epidemiology and Related Risk Factors of Preterm Labor as an obstetrics emergency.

Authors:  Ali Asghar Halimi Asl; Saeed Safari; Mohsen Parvareshi Hamrah
Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)       Date:  2017-01-08

3.  The biomechanics of amnion rupture: an X-ray diffraction study.

Authors:  Che J Connon; Takahiro Nakamura; Andy Hopkinson; Andrew Quantock; Naoto Yagi; James Doutch; Keith M Meek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.