Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Methods of Medium Optimization01:28

Methods of Medium Optimization

Optimizing growth media enhances microbial proliferation and maximizes product yield. Statistical experimental design methodologies provide structured and reproducible approaches, offering progressively higher levels of robustness and efficiency.The One-Factor-at-a-Time (OFAT) MethodThe One-Factor-at-a-Time (OFAT) method involves adjusting a single variable while keeping all others constant. However, it cannot detect interactions between variables, often leading to suboptimal outcomes when...
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving01:29

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving

Mechanistic models play a crucial role in algorithms for numerical problem-solving, particularly in nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NMEM). These models aim to minimize specific objective functions by evaluating various parameter estimates, leading to the development of systematic algorithms. In some cases, linearization techniques approximate the model using linear equations.
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Health Performance in North America: An International Comparative Review of Canada and the United States with Implications for Women's Health Equity.

Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC·2026
Same author

Balancing How Much We Want to Know with What We Are Willing to Pay: A Comparative Cost Analysis of Prenatal Cytogenetic Testing and Screening Strategies.

Fetal diagnosis and therapy·2025
Same author

Intended vs. Actual Access to Care: Impact of Healthcare Consolidation on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.

Fetal diagnosis and therapy·2025
Same author

Current State of Artificial Intelligence Model Development in Obstetrics.

Obstetrics and gynecology·2025
Same author

Reconceptualizing Intrauterine Resuscitation and Its Short-Term Impact.

Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Reframing antepartum and intrapartum surveillance.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2024

Related Experiment Videos

Performance adjusted risks: a method to improve the quality of algorithm performance while allowing all to play.

Mark I Evans1, Howard S Cuckle

  • 1Comprehensive Genetics, Fetal Medicine Foundation of America, and Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Mt Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10065, USA. Evans@compregen.com

Prenatal Diagnosis
|June 22, 2011
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Quality variations in ultrasound nuchal translucency screening impact Down syndrome detection. The new Performance Adjusted Risks (PAR) method corrects for provider differences, improving screening accuracy for all patients.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

  • Prenatal screening
  • Maternal serum screening
  • Fetal ultrasound

Background:

  • Ultrasound nuchal translucency (NT) measurements are crucial for Down syndrome screening.
  • Variations in provider quality and laboratory performance can significantly affect screening accuracy.
  • Existing screening methods do not adequately account for these quality differences.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To introduce a novel method, Performance Adjusted Risks (PAR), to account for inter-provider and inter-laboratory quality variations in NT screening.
  • To improve the accuracy and reliability of Down syndrome screening by adjusting for performance differences.
  • To provide a standardized approach for risk assessment in prenatal screening.

Main Methods:

  • Comparing individual provider/laboratory marker distributions against national standards.
  • Calculating handicap and weighting factors based on maximum absolute deviation.
  • Correcting Down syndrome risks using derived weights, with greater adjustments for higher handicaps.
  • Illustrating the method with theoretical examples and evaluating its impact on real-world screening data.

Main Results:

  • Inaccuracy or imprecision of 10% in markers resulted in handicaps from 4 to 11, altering individual risks by -40% to +250%.
  • When simulated with 10% inaccuracy, the detection rate increased from 59% to 75% after applying PAR weighting.
  • The PAR method demonstrates a significant improvement in detection rates by mitigating the effects of performance variability.

Conclusions:

  • The PAR method acknowledges that provider performance varies and aims to standardize screening outcomes.
  • It protects patients from the negative impact of suboptimal provider performance.
  • PAR enables broader participation in screening while ensuring patient safety and improving overall diagnostic accuracy.