Author
Listed:
- Kazuyoshi Aoyama
- Rohan D’Souza
- Ruxandra Pinto
- Joel G Ray
- Andrea Hill
- Damon C Scales
- Stephen E Lapinsky
- Gareth R Seaward
- Michelle Hladunewich
- Prakesh S Shah
- Robert A Fowler
Abstract
Purpose: Pregnancy-related critical illness leads to death for 3–14% of affected women. Although identifying patients at risk could facilitate preventive strategies, guide therapy, and help in clinical research, no prior systematic review of this literature exploring the validity of risk prediction models for maternal mortality exists. Therefore, we have systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed risk prediction models for maternal mortality. Methods: Search strategy: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus, from inception to May 2017. Results: Thirty-eight studies that evaluated 12 different mortality prediction models were included. Mortality varied across the studies, with an average rate 10.4%, ranging from 0 to 41.7%. The Collaborative Integrated Pregnancy High-dependency Estimate of Risk (CIPHER) model and the Maternal Severity Index had the best performance, were developed and validated from studies of obstetric population with a low risk of bias. The CIPHER applies to critically ill obstetric patients (discrimination: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.823 (0.811–0.835), calibration: graphic plot [intercept—0.09, slope 0.92]). The Maternal Severity Index applies to hospitalized obstetric patients (discrimination: AUC 0.826 [0.802–0.851], calibration: standardized mortality ratio 1.02 [0.86–1.20]). Conclusions: Despite the high heterogeneity of the study populations and the limited number of studies validating the finally eligible prediction models, the CIPHER and the Maternal Severity Index are recommended for use among critically ill and hospitalized pregnant and postpartum women for risk adjustment in clinical research and quality improvement studies. Neither index has sufficient discrimination to be applicable for clinical decision making at the individual patient level.
Suggested Citation
Kazuyoshi Aoyama & Rohan D’Souza & Ruxandra Pinto & Joel G Ray & Andrea Hill & Damon C Scales & Stephen E Lapinsky & Gareth R Seaward & Michelle Hladunewich & Prakesh S Shah & Robert A Fowler, 2018.
"Risk prediction models for maternal mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, December.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0208563
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208563
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0208563. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.