Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Paediatric and Perin...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology
Article . 2020 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Validation of criteria to identify severe maternal morbidity

Authors: Katherine P. Himes; Lisa M. Bodnar;

Validation of criteria to identify severe maternal morbidity

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundEpidemiologic research on severe maternal morbidity often relies on a screening definition of the outcome because a gold standard approach requires medical record review.ObjectiveTo determine the validity of screening or identification criteria to classify cases of severe maternal morbidity using the definition of severe maternal morbidity proposed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).MethodsFrom all singleton deliveries at Magee‐Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (2010‐2011; n = 19 307), we selected all deliveries that had at least one screening or identification criteria for severe maternal morbidity (n = 349) and a random sample of deliveries with no case identification criteria (n = 349). Screen‐positive deliveries were a delivery with any of the following: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision diagnosis and procedure codes for the identification of severe maternal morbidity; prolonged post‐partum length of stay; or maternal intensive care unit admission. We identified true cases through detailed chart review using the suggested diagnoses in the 2016 ACOG and SMFM Obstetric Care Consensus on severe maternal morbidity. We calculated the positive and negative predictive values of the screening criteria.ResultsApproximately 1.8% of deliveries screened positive for severe maternal morbidity. After medical record review, 166 screen‐positive deliveries were true cases (48% positive predictive value), and 347 screen‐negative cases were true negatives (99% negative predictive value). Two screen‐negative cases were false negatives. If we applied the negative predictive value to the population, 109 true cases would be missed with these criteria.ConclusionThe criteria we used to identify potential cases of severe acute maternal morbidity had poor performance in our cohort. In the absence of resources to apply the gold standard outcome definition to a large population, validation data and analytic strategies that incorporate measurement error are essential to estimate the direction and magnitude of the resulting bias.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Patient Selection, Pennsylvania, Delivery, Obstetric, Severity of Illness Index, Medical Records, Hospitalization, Pregnancy Complications, International Classification of Diseases, Pregnancy, Epidemiological Monitoring, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Humans, Female, Morbidity, Selection Bias

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    48
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
48
Top 1%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!