Biases of traditional term prediction models: Results from different sample-based models evaluated on 41 343 ultrasound examinations

Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 728-734

  Okland I ^a,c   Gjessing, H K ^d,e   Grottum P ^f   Eik Nes, S H ^a,b  

^a TRONDHEIM UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^c STAVANGER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^d NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Norway)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^f UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

Author keywords

date of delivery; fetal measurements; gestational age; population based; routine ultrasound examination; second trimester; term prediction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DELIVERY; ECHOGRAPHY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FEMUR; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; GESTATIONAL AGE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MULTICENTER STUDY; NORWAY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DEVELOPMENT; REFERENCE VALUE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SKULL;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; FEMUR; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMANS; NORWAY; PARIETAL BONE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREGNANCY; REFERENCE VALUES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 78649674089     PISSN: 09607692     EISSN: 14690705     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/uog.7707     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Markestad T, Kaaresen PI, Rønnestad A, Reigstad H, Lossius K, Medbo S, Zanussi G, Engelund IE, Skjaerven R, Irgens LM,. Early death, morbidity, and need of treatment among extremely premature infants. Pediatrics 2005; 115: 1289-1298.
2. Heimstad R, Romundstad PR, Eik-Nes SH, Salvesen KA,. Outcomes of pregnancy beyond 37 weeks of gestation. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108: 500-508.
3. Campbell S,. The prediction of fetal maturity by ultrasonic measurement of the biparietal diameter. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw 1969; 76: 603-609.
4. Gardosi J, Geirsson RT,. Routine ultrasound is the method of choice for dating pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105: 933-936.
5. Persson PH,. Ultrasound dating of pregnancy-still controversial? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999; 14: 9-11.
6. Tunón K, Eik-Nes SH, Grøttum P,. A comparison between ultrasound and a reliable last menstrual period as predictors of the day of delivery in 15 000 examinations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1996; 8: 178-185.
7. Saltvedt S, Almstrom H, Kublickas M, Reilly M, Valentin L, Grunewald C,. Ultrasound dating at 12-14 or 15-20 weeks of gestation? A prospective cross-validation of established dating formulae in a population of in-vitro fertilized pregnancies randomized to early or late dating scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24: 42-50.
8. Taipale P, Hiilesmaa V,. Predicting delivery date by ultrasound and last menstrual period in early gestation. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97: 189-194.
9. Tunón K, Eik-Nes SH, Grøttum P,. The impact of fetal, maternal and external factors on prediction of the day of delivery by the use of ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 11: 99-103.
10. Hutchon DJ, Ahmed F,. Naegele's rule: a reappraisal. BJOG 2001; 108: 775.
11. Eik-Nes SH, Grøttum P,. Graviditetskalenderen Snurra. Scan-Med A/S, Drammen, Norway, 1983.
12. Johnsen SL, Rasmussen S, Sollien R, Kiserud T,. Fetal age assessment based on ultrasound head biometry and the effect of maternal and fetal factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004; 83: 716-723.
13. Johnsen SL, Rasmussen S, Sollien R, Kiserud T,. Fetal age assessment based on femur length at 10-25 weeks of gestation, and reference ranges for femur length to head circumference ratios. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005; 84: 725-733.
14. Altman DG, Chitty LS,. New charts for ultrasound dating of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997; 10: 174-191.
15. Hansmann M,. Ultraschallbiometrie im II. und III. Trimester des Schwangerschaft. Gynäkologe 1976; 9: 133-155.
16. Campbell S, Thoms A,. Ultrasound measurement of the fetal head to abdomen circumference ratio in the assessment of growth retardation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1977; 84: 165-174.
17. Goldstein RB, Filly RA, Simpson G,. Pitfalls in femur length measurements. J Ultrasound Med 1987; 6: 203-207.
18. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Deter RL, Park SK,. Fetal femur length as a predictor of menstrual age: sonographically measured. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1982; 138: 875-878.
19. Kurmanavicius J, Wright EM, Royston P, Zimmermann R, Huch R, Huch A, Wisser J,. Fetal ultrasound biometry: 2. Abdomen and femur length reference values. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 136-143.
20. Rosati P, Guariglia L, Capelli G,. A new mathematical formula for predicting long bone length in early pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19: 184-189.
21. Gjessing HK, Grøttum P, Eik-Nes SH,. A direct method for ultrasound prediction of day of delivery: a new, population-based approach. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 30: 19-27.
22. Økland I, BjÃstad TG, Johansen TF, Gjessing HK, Grøttum P, Eik-Nes SH,. OC14.06: Femur length measurements are influenced by beam width. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 34 (Suppl. 1): 27.
23. Gjessing HK, Grøttum P,. Accuracy of second trimester fetal head circumference and biparietal diameter for predicting the time of spontaneous birth. J Perinat Med 2007; 35: 350-351; author reply 351-352.
24. R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, 2008;. [Accessed 17 December 2008].
25. Salomon LJ, Pizzi C, Gasparrini A, Bernard JP, Ville Y,. Prediction of the date of delivery based on first trimester ultrasound measurements: an independent method from estimated date of conception. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010; 23: 1-9.
26. Jago JR, Whittingham TA, Heslop R,. The influence of ultrasound scanner beam width on femur length measurements. Ultrasound Med Biol 1994; 20: 699-703.
27. Sahota DS, Kagan KO, Lau TK, Leung TY, Nicolaides KH,. Customized birth weight: coefficients and validation of models in a UK population. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 32: 884-889.
28. Verburg BO, Steegers EA, De Ridder M, Snijders RJ, Smith E, Hofman A, Moll HA, Jaddoe VW, Witteman JC,. New charts for ultrasound dating of pregnancy and assessment of fetal growth: longitudinal data from a population-based cohort study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31: 388-396.