Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2026

Assessment and Evaluation of the High Risk Neonate: The NICU Network Neurobehavioral Scale
Published on: August 25, 2014
Use of the Optimality Index-United States in perinatal clinical research: a validation study
Lisa Kane Low1, Julia S Seng, Janis M Miller
1University of Michigan, 400 N Ingalls, Rm 3249, School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. kanelow@umich.edu
The objective of this study was to assess the validity and observed effect size of a new instrument, the Optimality Index-United States (OI-US), for use in perinatal clinical research. Using a large, hospital-based, midwifery service clinical database that included complete obstetric data for 3425 women, we examined discriminant validity and the effects of two different scoring methods used with the OI-US. Discriminant validity was confirmed by comparing OI scores for women who remained low risk and did not require physician involvement in their care (OI score mean = 84%; standard deviation [SD] = 8%) compared to those whose condition changed to require physician involvement in their care (mean = 71%; SD = 10%; P < .001). Two methods of scoring the OI-US were compared, finding no significant difference and suggesting that the types of data available and the research question can drive this decision. Finally, effect size was calculated by two methods: Cohen's d (-1.4) and the effect size correlation (r = -0.548), the latter of which corresponds to a d of -1.3, both resulting in a similarly large effect size estimation. The OI-US is a new instrument that shows promise for use in perinatal clinical research, particularly when assessing more subtle clinical differences in outcomes between study groups.
The objective of this study was to assess the validity and observed effect size of a new instrument, the Optimality Index-United States (OI-US), for use in perinatal clinical research. Using a large, hospital-based, midwifery service clinical database that included complete obstetric data for 3425 women, we examined discriminant validity and the effects of two different scoring methods used with the OI-US. Discriminant validity was confirmed by comparing OI scores for women who remained low risk and did not require physician involvement in their care (OI score mean = 84%; standard deviation [SD] = 8%) compared to those whose condition changed to require physician involvement in their care (mean = 71%; SD = 10%; P < .001). Two methods of scoring the OI-US were compared, finding no significant difference and suggesting that the types of data available and the research question can drive this decision. Finally, effect size was calculated by two methods: Cohen's d (-1.4) and the effect size correlation (r = -0.548), the latter of which corresponds to a d of -1.3, both resulting in a similarly large effect size estimation. The OI-US is a new instrument that shows promise for use in perinatal clinical research, particularly when assessing more subtle clinical differences in outcomes between study groups.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Regression Toward the Mean
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
Bias in Epidemiological Studies