Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 15, 2026

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
ASPRE trial: incidence of preterm pre-eclampsia in patients fulfilling ACOG and NICE criteria according to risk by
L C Poon1,2, D L Rolnik3, M Y Tan3,4
1King's College London, London, UK.
Insights
Screening for preterm pre-eclampsia (PE) using National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) or American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) criteria, but not the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm, significantly reduces PE risk. This supports personalized risk-based screening.
Area of Science:
- Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Maternal-Fetal Medicine
- Diagnostic Accuracy
Background:
- Preterm pre-eclampsia (PE) poses significant risks to maternal and fetal health.
- Current screening guidelines, such as those from NICE and ACOG, identify women at risk.
- The Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm offers a comprehensive screening method combining maternal factors and biomarkers.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the incidence of preterm PE in women identified as screen-positive by NICE and ACOG criteria.
- To compare this incidence with that in women screened by the FMF algorithm (both screen-positive and screen-negative).
- To evaluate the effectiveness of the FMF algorithm in risk stratification for preterm PE.
Main Methods:
- Secondary analysis of data from the ASPRE study.
- Inclusion of 34,573 women with singleton pregnancies undergoing prospective screening for preterm PE at 11-13 weeks' gestation.
- Calculation of preterm PE incidence based on NICE, ACOG, and FMF screening criteria.
Main Results:
- Women meeting NICE or ACOG criteria but screening negative by FMF algorithm had a significantly reduced incidence of preterm PE (0.25% for ACOG, 0.65% for NICE high-risk, 0.42% for NICE moderate-risk).
- The relative incidence of preterm PE in FMF screen-negative versus screen-positive individuals was consistently low across criteria (0.051 to 0.085).
- The FMF algorithm demonstrated superior risk stratification compared to NICE and ACOG criteria alone.
Conclusions:
- Screening positive by ACOG or NICE criteria but negative by the FMF algorithm indicates a substantially reduced risk of preterm PE.
- These findings reinforce the value of personalized, risk-based screening using a combination of maternal factors and biomarkers.
- The FMF algorithm provides a more accurate risk assessment for preterm PE.
Objective:
To report the incidence of preterm pre-eclampsia (PE) in women who are screen positive according to the criteria of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and compare the incidence with that in those who are screen positive or screen negative by The Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm.
Methods:
This was a secondary analysis of data from the ASPRE study. The study population consisted of women with singleton pregnancy who underwent prospective screening for preterm PE by means of the FMF algorithm, which combines maternal factors and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks' gestation. The incidence of preterm PE in women fulfilling the NICE and ACOG criteria was estimated; in these patients the incidence of preterm PE was then calculated in those who were screen negative relative to those who were screen positive by the FMF algorithm.
Results:
A total of 34 573 women with singleton pregnancy delivering at ≥ 24 weeks' gestation underwent prospective screening for preterm PE, of which 239 (0.7%) cases developed preterm PE. At least one of the ACOG criteria was fulfilled in 22 287 (64.5%) pregnancies and the incidence of preterm PE was 0.97% (95% CI, 0.85-1.11%); in the subgroup that was screen positive by the FMF algorithm the incidence of preterm PE was 4.80% (95% CI, 4.14-5.55%), and in those that were screen negative it was 0.25% (95% CI, 0.18-0.33%), with a relative incidence in FMF screen negative to FMF screen positive of 0.051 (95% CI, 0.037-0.071). In 1392 (4.0%) pregnancies, at least one of the NICE high-risk criteria was fulfilled, and in this group the incidence of preterm PE was 5.17% (95% CI, 4.13-6.46%); in the subgroups of screen positive and screen negative by the FMF algorithm, the incidence of preterm PE was 8.71% (95% CI, 6.93-10.89%) and 0.65% (95% CI, 0.25-1.67%), respectively, and the relative incidence was 0.075 (95% CI, 0.028-0.205). In 2360 (6.8%) pregnancies fulfilling at least two of the NICE moderate-risk criteria, the incidence of preterm PE was 1.74% (95% CI, 1.28-2.35%); in the subgroups of screen positive and screen negative by the FMF algorithm the incidence was 4.91% (95% CI, 3.54-6.79%) and 0.42% (95% CI, 0.20-0.86%), respectively, and the relative incidence was 0.085 (95% CI, 0.038-0.192).
Conclusion:
In women who are screen positive for preterm PE by the ACOG or NICE criteria but screen negative by the FMF algorithm, the risk of preterm PE is reduced to within or below background levels. The results provide further evidence to support the personalized risk-based screening method that combines maternal factors and biomarkers. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Related Concept Videos
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Stereotype Threat and Self-fulfilling Prophecies
Prevalence and Incidence
Prevalence indicates the proportion of individuals in a population who have a specific disease or health...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I
Clinical Trials: Overview

