ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
External validation and updating of the Rossi nomogram for predicting cesarean delivery following induction: is the Bishop score valuable?
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study sought to validate the Rossi nomogram in a Chinese population and then to include the Bishop score to see if it has an effect on the accuracy of the nomogram. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe Rossi predictive model was applied and externally validated in a retrospective cohort from August 2017 and July 2023 in a Chinese tertiary-level medical center. For the revision and updating of the models, the regression coefficients of all the predictors (except race) were re-estimated and then the cervical Bishop score at the time of induction was added. Each model's performance was measured using the receiver-operating characteristic and calibration plots. Decision curve analysis determined the range of the probability threshold for each prediction model that would be of clinical value.
resultsA total of 721 women met the inclusion criteria, of whom 183 (25.4%) underwent a cesarean delivery. The calibration demonstrated the underestimation of the original model, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.789 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.753-0.825, p < 0.001). After recalibrating the original model, the discriminative performance was improved from 0.789 to 0.803. Moreover, the discriminatory power of the updated model was further improved when the Bishop score at the time of induction was added to the recalibrated multivariable model. Indeed, the updated model demonstrated good calibration and discriminatory power, with an AUC of 0.811. The decision curve analysis indicated that all the models (original, recalibrated, and updated) provided higher net benefits of between 0 and 60% of the probability threshold, which indicates the benefits of using the models to make decisions concerning patients who fall within the identified range of the probability threshold. The net benefits of the updated model were higher than those of the original model and the recalibrated model.
conclusionThe nomogram used to predict cesarean delivery following induction developed by Rossi et al. has been validated in a Chinese population in this study. More specifically, adaptation to a Chinese population by excluding ethnicity and including the Bishop score prior to induction gave rise to better performance. The three models (original, recalibrated, and updated) offer higher net benefits when the probability threshold is between 0 and 60%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38806943What 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.