Development and validation of a new clinical decision support tool to optimize screening for retinopathy of prematurity.
ROP screening
clinical decision support tool
diagnostic tests/Investigation
neovascularisation
optimized screening
prediction model
preterm
retinopathy of prematurity
Journal
The British journal of ophthalmology
ISSN: 1468-2079
Titre abrégé: Br J Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0421041
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2022
11 2022
Historique:
received:
22
12
2020
revised:
21
04
2021
accepted:
23
04
2021
pubmed:
14
5
2021
medline:
25
10
2022
entrez:
13
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Prematurely born infants undergo costly, stressful eye examinations to uncover the small fraction with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) that needs treatment to prevent blindness. The aim was to develop a prediction tool (DIGIROP-Screen) with 100% sensitivity and high specificity to safely reduce screening of those infants not needing treatment. DIGIROP-Screen was compared with four other ROP models based on longitudinal weights. Data, including infants born at 24-30 weeks of gestational age (GA), for DIGIROP-Screen development (DevGroup, N=6991) originate from the Swedish National Registry for ROP. Three international cohorts comprised the external validation groups (ValGroups, N=1241). Multivariable logistic regressions, over postnatal ages (PNAs) 6-14 weeks, were validated. Predictors were birth characteristics, status and age at first diagnosed ROP and essential interactions. ROP treatment was required in 287 (4.1%)/6991 infants in DevGroup and 49 (3.9%)/1241 in ValGroups. To allow 100% sensitivity in DevGroup, specificity at birth was 53.1% and cumulatively 60.5% at PNA 8 weeks. Applying the same cut-offs in ValGroups, specificities were similar (46.3% and 53.5%). One infant with severe malformations in ValGroups was incorrectly classified as not needing screening. For all other infants, at PNA 6-14 weeks, sensitivity was 100%. In other published models, sensitivity ranged from 88.5% to 100% and specificity ranged from 9.6% to 45.2%. DIGIROP-Screen, a clinical decision support tool using readily available birth and ROP screening data for infants born GA 24-30 weeks, in the European and North American populations tested can safely identify infants not needing ROP screening. DIGIROP-Screen had equal or higher sensitivity and specificity compared with other models. DIGIROP-Screen should be tested in any new cohort for validation and if not validated it can be modified using the same statistical approaches applied to a specific clinical setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/AIMS
Prematurely born infants undergo costly, stressful eye examinations to uncover the small fraction with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) that needs treatment to prevent blindness. The aim was to develop a prediction tool (DIGIROP-Screen) with 100% sensitivity and high specificity to safely reduce screening of those infants not needing treatment. DIGIROP-Screen was compared with four other ROP models based on longitudinal weights.
METHODS
Data, including infants born at 24-30 weeks of gestational age (GA), for DIGIROP-Screen development (DevGroup, N=6991) originate from the Swedish National Registry for ROP. Three international cohorts comprised the external validation groups (ValGroups, N=1241). Multivariable logistic regressions, over postnatal ages (PNAs) 6-14 weeks, were validated. Predictors were birth characteristics, status and age at first diagnosed ROP and essential interactions.
RESULTS
ROP treatment was required in 287 (4.1%)/6991 infants in DevGroup and 49 (3.9%)/1241 in ValGroups. To allow 100% sensitivity in DevGroup, specificity at birth was 53.1% and cumulatively 60.5% at PNA 8 weeks. Applying the same cut-offs in ValGroups, specificities were similar (46.3% and 53.5%). One infant with severe malformations in ValGroups was incorrectly classified as not needing screening. For all other infants, at PNA 6-14 weeks, sensitivity was 100%. In other published models, sensitivity ranged from 88.5% to 100% and specificity ranged from 9.6% to 45.2%.
CONCLUSIONS
DIGIROP-Screen, a clinical decision support tool using readily available birth and ROP screening data for infants born GA 24-30 weeks, in the European and North American populations tested can safely identify infants not needing ROP screening. DIGIROP-Screen had equal or higher sensitivity and specificity compared with other models. DIGIROP-Screen should be tested in any new cohort for validation and if not validated it can be modified using the same statistical approaches applied to a specific clinical setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33980506
pii: bjophthalmol-2020-318719
doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-318719
pmc: PMC8627649
mid: NIHMS1756987
doi:
Substances chimiques
Peptide Nucleic Acids
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1573-1580Subventions
Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : R01 EY017017
Pays : United States
Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : R01 EY030904
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U54 HD090255
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2019 Nov 01;137(11):1265-1272
pubmed: 31486844
Arch Ophthalmol. 2012 Dec;130(12):1560-5
pubmed: 23229697
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2020 Jan 1;138(1):31-37
pubmed: 31725856
Arch Ophthalmol. 2012 Aug;130(8):992-9
pubmed: 22491391
Pediatrics. 2009 Apr;123(4):e638-45
pubmed: 19289449
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017 Aug 1;135(8):871-877
pubmed: 28715553
Arch Ophthalmol. 2005 Jul;123(7):991-9
pubmed: 16009843
Arch Ophthalmol. 2003 Dec;121(12):1684-94
pubmed: 14662586
Pediatrics. 2018 Dec;142(6):
pubmed: 30478242
Pediatrics. 2011 Mar;127(3):e598-606
pubmed: 21321034
Ophthalmology. 2016 Apr;123(4):804-16
pubmed: 26832657
Surv Ophthalmol. 2018 Sep - Oct;63(5):618-637
pubmed: 29679617
J Perinatol. 2020 Jul;40(7):1100-1108
pubmed: 32111976
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006 Dec;124(12):1711-8
pubmed: 17159030
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 Sep 1;136(9):1034-1040
pubmed: 30003216
BMC Pediatr. 2008 Feb 29;8:8
pubmed: 18307822
Pediatrics. 2004 Nov;114(5):1362-4
pubmed: 15520122
Adv Neonatal Care. 2011 Aug;11(4):291-7
pubmed: 22123352
BMC Pediatr. 2012 Aug 28;12:132
pubmed: 22928523
Int J Ophthalmol. 2019 Feb 18;12(2):296-301
pubmed: 30809488
J AAPOS. 2016 Jun;20(3):220-5
pubmed: 27166790
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2018 Sep 20;55(5):326-334
pubmed: 29913021
Clin Perinatol. 2013 Jun;40(2):261-70
pubmed: 23719309
Eye (Lond). 2012 Mar;26(3):400-6
pubmed: 22193874
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012 Feb;17(1):26-9
pubmed: 21903492
Pediatr Res. 2013 Dec;74 Suppl 1:35-49
pubmed: 24366462
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 Dec 1;136(12):1383-1389
pubmed: 30326046
Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila). 2019 Mar-Apr;8(2):178-186
pubmed: 31037876
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2020 Jan 1;138(1):21-29
pubmed: 31697330
Arch Ophthalmol. 2009 May;127(5):622-7
pubmed: 19433710
Br J Ophthalmol. 2018 Jan;102(1):9-13
pubmed: 28855196
Early Hum Dev. 2008 Feb;84(2):71-4
pubmed: 18280404
Ophthalmologe. 2018 Jun;115(6):469-475
pubmed: 29500715
Br J Ophthalmol. 2020 Jul;104(7):943-949
pubmed: 31676594