ArticleBMJ open2017
Performance of a postnatal metabolic gestational age algorithm: a retrospective validation study among ethnic subgroups in Canada.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of prenatal and postnatal biomarkers for estimating gestational age: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Machine learning prediction of gestational age from metabolic screening markers resistant to ambient temperature transportation: Facilitating use of this technology in low resource settings of South Asia and East Africa.Journal of global health · 2022Article
- Real world external validation of metabolic gestational age assessment in Kenya.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Using AMANHI-ACT cohorts for external validation of Iowa new-born metabolic profiles based models for postnatal gestational age estimation.Journal of global health · 2021Article
- External validation of machine learning models including newborn metabolomic markers for postnatal gestational age estimation in East and South-East Asian infants.Gates open research · 2020Article
- Postnatal gestational age estimation via newborn screening analysis: application and potential.Expert review of proteomics · 2019Article
- Article
- Metabolic profiles derived from residual blood spot samples: A longitudinal analysis.Gates open research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesBiological modelling of routinely collected newborn screening data has emerged as a novel method for deriving postnatal gestational age estimates. Validation of published models has previously been limited to cohorts largely consisting of infants of white Caucasian ethnicity. In this study, we sought to determine the validity of a published gestational age estimation algorithm among recent immigrants to Canada, where maternal landed immigrant status was used as a surrogate measure of infant ethnicity.
designWe conducted a retrospective validation study in infants born in Ontario between April 2009 and September 2011.
settingProvincial data from Ontario, Canada were obtained from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
participantsThe dataset included 230 034 infants born to non-landed immigrants and 70 098 infants born to immigrant mothers. The five most common countries of maternal origin were India (n=10 038), China (n=7468), Pakistan (n=5824), The Philippines (n=5441) and Vietnam (n=1408). Maternal country of origin was obtained from Citizenship and Immigration Canada's Landed Immigrant Database. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Performance of a postnatal gestational age algorithm was evaluated across non-immigrant and immigrant populations.
resultsRoot mean squared error (RMSE) of 1.05 weeks was observed for infants born to non-immigrant mothers, whereas RMSE ranged from 0.98 to 1.15 weeks among infants born to immigrant mothers. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for distinguishing term versus preterm infants (≥37 vs <37 weeks gestational age or >34 vs ≤34 weeks gestational age) was 0.958 and 0.986, respectively, in the non-immigrant subgroup and ranged from 0.927 to 0.964 and 0.966 to 0.99 in the immigrant subgroups.
conclusionsAlgorithms for postnatal determination of gestational age may be further refined by development and validation of region or ethnicity-specific models. However, our results provide reassurance that an algorithm developed from Ontario-born infant cohorts performs well across a range of ethnicities and maternal countries of origin without modification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.