Predictive Models for Very Preterm Birth: Developing a Point-of-Care Tool

Abstract

Objective The objective of this study was to create three point-of-care predictive models for very preterm birth using variables available at three different time points: prior to pregnancy, at the end of the first trimester, and mid-pregnancy.

Study Design This is a retrospective cohort study of 359,396 Ohio Medicaid mothers from 2008 to 2015. The last baby for each mother was included in the final dataset. Births prior to 22 weeks were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to create three models. These models were validated on a cohort that was set aside and not part of the model development. The main outcome measure was birth prior to 32 weeks.

Results The final dataset contained 359,396 live births with 6,516 (1.81%) very preterm births. All models had excellent calibration. Goodness-of-fit tests suggested strong agreement between the probabilities estimated by the model and the actual outcome experience in the data. The mid-pregnancy model had acceptable discrimination with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of approximately 0.75 in both the developmental and validation datasets.

Conclusion Using data from a large Ohio Medicaid cohort we developed point-of-care predictive models that could be used before pregnancy, after the first trimester, and in mid-pregnancy to estimate the probability of very preterm birth. Future work is needed to determine how the calculator could be used to target interventions to prevent very preterm birth.

Key Points

• We developed predictive models for very preterm birth.

• All models showed excellent calibration.

• The models were integrated into a risk calculator.

Keywords

preterm birth - predictive model - infant mortality

Authors' Contributions

The work was conceived and designed by S.G.G and P.T.G., S.L., G.N., and C.L.H. Data analysis and interpretation were performed by S.L., G.N., and J.B. and G.P.. The article was drafted jointly by C.L.H., G.N., S.L., S.G.G, and P.T.G. All authors reviewed and critically revised the article. All authors approved the final version.

Note

IRB approval for all aspects of this study was obtained through the Ohio Department of Health IRB (Protocol numbers 2016–41, approved July 26, 2016 and 2017–39, date of initial approval July 25, 17) and the Ohio State University IRB (protocol number 2016B02291, date of initial approval September 25, 2016).

^* Presently an independent consultant.

Publication History

Received: 28 February 2020

Accepted: 13 June 2020

Article published online:
23 August 2020

• References

• 1 OECD—Social Policy Division. Co1.1: Infant mortality. Accessed December 4, 2017 at: https://www.oecd.org/els/family/CO_1_1_Infant_mortality.pdf
• 2 Kochanek KD, Murphy SL, Xu J, Tejada-Vera B. Deaths: final data for 2014. National vital statistics reports: from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System. National Vital Statistics System. 2016; 65 (04) 1-122
• 3 Rossen LM, Schoendorf KC. Trends in racial and ethnic disparities in infant mortality rates in the United States, 1989-2006. Am J Public Health 2014; 104 (08) 1549-1556
• 4 MacDorman MF. Race and ethnic disparities in fetal mortality, preterm birth, and infant mortality in the United States: an overview. Semin Perinatol 2011; 35 (04) 200-208
• 5 Infant Mortality Research Partnership. Accessed September 28, 2018 at: https://grc.osu.edu/projects/IMRP
• 6 Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB. et al; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU). Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109 (04) 806-812
• 7 Baer RJ, McLemore MR, Adler N. et al. Pre-pregnancy or first-trimester risk scoring to identify women at high risk of preterm birth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018; 231: 235-240
• 8 Davey MA, Watson L, Rayner JA, Rowlands S. Risk-scoring systems for predicting preterm birth with the aim of reducing associated adverse outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (10) CD004902
• 9 Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, Romero R. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet 2008; 371 (9606): 75-84
• 10 Royston P, Altman DG. Regression using fractional polynomials of continuous covariates—parsimonious parametric modeling. J R Stat Soc C Appl 1994; 43 (03) 429-467
• 11 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied Logistic Regression. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2013: 1-500
• 12 Paul P, Pennell ML, Lemeshow S. Standardizing the power of the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test in large data sets. Stat Med 2013; 32 (01) 67-80
• 13 Gabbe PT, Reno R, Clutter C. et al. Improving maternal and infant child health outcomes with community-based pregnancy support groups: outcomes from Moms2B Ohio. Matern Child Health J 2017; 21 (05) 1130-1138
• 14 Lengyel CS, Ehrlich S, Iams JD, Muglia LJ, DeFranco EA. Effect of modifiable risk factors on preterm birth: a population based cohort. Matern Child Health J 2017; 21 (04) 777-785
• 15 Reichman NE, Hade EM. Validation of birth certificate data. A study of women in New Jersey's HealthStart program. Ann Epidemiol 2001; 11 (03) 186-193
• 16 Reichman NE, Schwartz-Soicher O. Accuracy of birth certificate data by risk factors and outcomes: analysis of data from New Jersey. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197 (01) 32.e1-32.e8
• 17 Honest H, Forbes CA, Durée KH. et al. Screening to prevent spontaneous preterm birth: systematic reviews of accuracy and effectiveness literature with economic modelling. Health Technol Assess 2009; 13 (43) 1-627
• 18 Amarasingham R, Patzer RE, Huesch M, Nguyen NQ, Xie B. Implementing electronic health care predictive analytics: considerations and challenges. Health Aff (Millwood) 2014; 33 (07) 1148-1154
• 19 Goyal NK, Hall ES, Greenberg JM, Kelly EA. Risk prediction for adverse pregnancy outcomes in a medicaid population. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2015; 24 (08) 681-688