Corrigendum to: A clinical prediction model to assess the risk of operative delivery (BJOG, (2012), 119, (915-23), 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03334.x);A clinical prediction model to assess the risk of operative delivery

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 119, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 915-923

  Schuit, E ^a   Kwee, A ^a   Westerhuis, M E M H ^a   Van Dessel, H J H M ^b   Graziosi, G C M ^c   Van Lith, J M M ^d   Nijhuis, J G ^e   Oei, S G ^f   Oosterbaan, H P ^g   Schuitemaker, N W E ^h   Wouters, M G A J ⁱ   Visser, G H A ^a   Mol, B W J ^j   Moons, K G M ^a   Groenwold, R H H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b CPRLab   (Netherlands)

^c ST ANTONIUS HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^d LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^f MÁXIMA MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^g JEROEN BOSCH HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^h DEPARTMENT OF SURGERY   (Netherlands)

ⁱ VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^j ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

more..

Author keywords

Caesarean section; failure to progress; instrumental vaginal delivery; prognostic model; suspected fetal distress

Indexed keywords

OXYTOCIN;

ADULT; AMNION FLUID; ARTICLE; BIRTH WEIGHT; BOOTSTRAPPING; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIABETES MELLITUS; EPIDURAL ANESTHESIA; FEMALE; FETUS DISTRESS; FEVER; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTAL DELIVERY; LABOR INDUCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MECONIUM; NOMOGRAM; PREDICTION; PREGNANCY; PREMATURE FETUS MEMBRANE RUPTURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SECONDARY ANALYSIS; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

EID: 84862571423     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.14664     Document Type: Erratum

References (38)

1. Notzon FC, Placek PJ, Taffel SM,. Comparisons of national cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 386-9.
2. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ, Mathews TJ, Osterman MJ,. Births: final data for 2008. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2010; 1: 71.
3. The Netherlands Perinatal Registry. Perinatal Care in the Netherlands, 2006. Utrecht: The Netherlands Perinatal Registry, 2008.
4. Kwee A, Elferink-Stinkens PM, Reuwer PJ, Bruinse HW,. Trends in obstetric interventions in the Dutch obstetrical care system in the period 1993-2002. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 132: 70-5.
5. Kozinszky Z, Orvos H, Zoboki T, Katona M, Wayda K, Pal A, et al., Risk factors for cesarean section of primiparous women aged over 35 years. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2002; 81: 313-6.
6. Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH,. The value of ultrasound in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24: 538-49.
7. Usha Kiran TS, Hemmadi S, Bethel J, Evans J,. Outcome of pregnancy in a woman with an increased body mass index. BJOG 2005; 112: 768-72.
8. Crane JM, Delaney T, Butt KD, Bennett KA, Hutchens D, Young DC,. Predictors of successful labor induction with oral or vaginal misoprostol. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004; 15: 319-23.
9. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. London: RCOG Press, 2001.
10. Fitzpatrick M, McQuillan K, O'Herlihy C,. Influence of persistent occiput posterior position on delivery outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98: 1027-31.
11. Morris JM, Thompson K, Smithey J, Gaffney G, Cooke I, Chamberlain P, et al., The usefulness of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid in predicting adverse outcome in prolonged pregnancy: a prospective blinded observational study. BJOG 2003; 110: 989-94.
12. Saunders N, Amis S, Marsh M,. The prognostic value of fetal ultrasonography before induction of labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 903-6.
13. Peregrine E, O'Brien P, Omar R, Jauniaux E,. Clinical and ultrasound parameters to predict the risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107: 227-33.
14. Chen G, Uryasev S, Young TK,. On prediction of the cesarean delivery risk in a large private practice. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191: 616-24.
15. Harper DM, Johnson CA, Harper WH, Liese BS,. Prenatal predictors of cesarean section due to labor arrest. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1995; 256: 67-74.
16. Hueston WJ,. Development of a cesarean delivery risk score. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 965-8.
17. Roman H, Blondel B, Breart G, Goffinet F,. Do risk factors for elective cesarean section differ from those of cesarean section during labor in low risk pregnancies? J Perinat Med 2008; 36: 297-305.
18. Seshadri L, Mukherjee B,. A predictive model for cesarean section in low risk pregnancies. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005; 89: 94-8.
19. Westerhuis ME, Visser GH, Moons KG, van BE, Benders MJ, Bijvoet SM, et al., Cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram compared with cardiotocography only for intrapartum monitoring: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 115: 1173-80.
20. Gopalani S, Bennett K, Critchlow C,. Factors predictive of failed operative vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191: 896-902.
21. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB,. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 1996; 15: 361-87.
22. Begg CB, Gray R,. Calculation of polychotomous logistic regression parameters using individualized regressions. Biometrika 1984; 71: 11-8.
23. Biesheuvel CJ, Vergouwe Y, Steyerberg EW, Grobbee DE, Moons KG,. Polytomous logistic regression analysis could be applied more often in diagnostic research. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 125-34.
24. Roukema J, van Loenhout RB, Steyerberg EW, Moons KG, Bleeker SE, Moll HA,. Polytomous regression did not outperform dichotomous logistic regression in diagnosing serious bacterial infections in febrile children. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 135-41.
25. Wijesinha A, Begg CB, Funkenstein HH, McNeil BJ,. Methodology for the differential diagnosis of a complex data set. A case study using data from routine CT scan examinations. Med Decis Making 1983; 3: 133-54.
26. Sun GW, Shook TL, Kay GL,. Inappropriate use of bivariable analysis to screen risk factors for use in multivariable analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 907-16.
27. Atkinson A,. A note on the generalized information criterion for choice of a model. Biometrika 2010; 67: 413-8.
28. Donders AR, van der Heijden GJ, Stijnen T, Moons KG,. Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 1087-91.
29. Greenland S, Finkle WD,. A critical look at methods for handling missing covariates in epidemiologic regression analyses. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 142: 1255-64.
30. van der Heijden GJ, Donders AR, Stijnen T, Moons KG,. Imputation of missing values is superior to complete case analysis and the missing-indicator method in multivariable diagnostic research: a clinical example. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 1102-9.
31. Vergouwe Y, Royston P, Moons KG, Altman DG,. Development and validation of a prediction model with missing predictor data: a practical approach. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 205-14.
32. Rubin DB,. Multiple Imputation for Non Response in Surveys. New York, NY: Wiley, 1987.
33. Miller ME, Hui SL, Tierney WM,. Validation techniques for logistic regression models. Stat Med 1991; 10: 1213-26.
34. Steyerberg EW,. Clinical Prediction Models: A Practical Approach to Development, Validation, and Updating. New York, NY: Springer, 2009.
35. Moons KG, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P,. Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ 2009; 338: b606.
36. Janssen KJ, Vergouwe Y, Kalkman CJ, Grobbee DE, Moons KG,. A simple method to adjust clinical prediction models to local circumstances. Can J Anaesth 2009; 56: 194-201.
37. Cohen JM, Hutcheon JA, Kramer MS, Joseph KS, Abenhaim H, Platt RW,. Influence of ultrasound-to-delivery interval and maternal-fetal characteristics on validity of estimated fetal weight. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 35: 434-41.
38. Dudley NJ,. A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25: 80-9.