Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on March 10, 2005
Human Reproduction 2005 20(6):1636-1641; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh821
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prospective validation of two models predicting pregnancy leading to live birth among untreated subfertile couples
1 Department of Public Health and 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam and 3 Department of Reproductive Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
4 To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: c.hunault{at}erasmusmc.nl
BACKGROUND: Models predicting clinical outcome need external validation before they can be applied safely in daily practice. This study aimed to validate two models for the prediction of the chance of treatment-independent pregnancy leading to live birth among subfertile couples. METHODS: The first model uses the woman's age, duration and type of subfertility, percentage of progressive sperm motility and referral status. The second model in addition uses the result of the post-coital test (PCT). For validation, these characteristics were collected prospectively in two University hospitals for 302 couples consulting for subfertility. The models' ability to distinguish between women who became pregnant and women who did not (discrimination) and the agreement between predicted and observed probabilities of treatment-independent pregnancy (calibration) were assessed. RESULTS: The discrimination of both models was slightly lower in the validation sample than in the original sample which provided the model. Calibration was good: the observed and predicted probabilities of treatment-independent pregnancy leading to live birth did not differ for both models. CONCLUSIONS: The chance of pregnancy leading to live birth was reliably estimated in the validation sample by both models. The use of PCT improved the discrimination of the models. These models can be useful in counselling subfertile couples.
Key words: PCT/prediction model/subfertility/treatment-independent pregnancy/validation
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Brandes, C.J.C.M. Hamilton, J.P. de Bruin, W.L.D.M. Nelen, and J.A.M. Kremer The relative contribution of IVF to the total ongoing pregnancy rate in a subfertile cohort Hum. Reprod., October 24, 2009; (2009) dep341v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Leushuis, J. W. van der Steeg, P. Steures, P. M.M. Bossuyt, M. J.C. Eijkemans, F. van der Veen, B. W.J. Mol, and P. G.A. Hompes Prediction models in reproductive medicine: a critical appraisal Hum. Reprod. Update, September 1, 2009; 15(5): 537 - 552. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.F.P.J. Coppus, F. van der Veen, B.C. Opmeer, B.W.J. Mol, and P.M.M. Bossuyt Evaluating prediction models in reproductive medicine Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2009; 24(8): 1774 - 1778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Devroey, B.C.J.M. Fauser, K. Diedrich, and on behalf of the Evian Annual Reproduction (EVAR) Approaches to improve the diagnosis and management of infertility Hum. Reprod. Update, July 1, 2009; 15(4): 391 - 408. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. L. Tollner, A. I. Yudin, C. A. Treece, J. W. Overstreet, and G. N. Cherr Macaque sperm coating protein DEFB126 facilitates sperm penetration of cervical mucus Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2008; 23(11): 2523 - 2534. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.L. Haadsma, H. Groen, V. Fidler, A. Bukman, E.M.A. Roeloffzen, E.R. Groenewoud, F.J.M. Broekmans, M.J. Heineman, and A. Hoek The predictive value of ovarian reserve tests for spontaneous pregnancy in subfertile ovulatory women Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2008; 23(8): 1800 - 1807. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F.J. Broekmans, J. Kwee, D.J. Hendriks, B.W. Mol, and C.B. Lambalk A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2006; 12(6): 685 - 718. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||

