A novel software for method comparison: MCS (method comparison software)-assessing agreement between estimated fetal...

Area of Science:

• Obstetrics and Gynecology
• Medical Statistics
• Prenatal Diagnosis

Background:

• Evaluating new health methods requires comparing their results against established reference methods.
• Accurate fetal weight estimation is crucial for prenatal care and monitoring.
• Method comparison studies assess agreement and accuracy between different measurement techniques.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine correlational and absolute agreement between measurement methods in clinical studies.
• To compare the accuracy and precision of Hadlock (I-V) formulas for fetal weight estimation.
• To evaluate various statistical methods including Bland-Altman analysis and regression techniques.

Main Methods:

• The study included singleton pregnancies with first-trimester ultrasonography-confirmed gestational ages.
• Estimated fetal weights were calculated using Hadlock formulas (I-V).
• Agreement between estimated and actual birth weights was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, ICC, CCC, and regression analyses.

Main Results:

• Bland-Altman analysis indicated that the Hadlock IV formula yielded estimated fetal weights most consistent with actual birth weights.
• Regression analyses and other statistical measures corroborated the superior performance of the Hadlock IV formula.
• The study identified Hadlock IV as the most precise formula for fetal weight estimation in the studied cohort.

Conclusions:

• The Hadlock IV formula provides the closest fetal weight estimations to actual birth weights.
• This research highlights the utility of statistical methods for validating clinical measurement tools.
• The study also demonstrated the effectiveness of a new web-based software (Method Comparison Software - MCS) for evaluating method agreement.