Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 14, 2026
Electrochemiluminescence Assays for Human Islet Autoantibodies
Published on: March 23, 2018
Comparison of first trimester preeclampsia combined screening performances with various approaches in the Indonesian
Adly Nanda Al Fattah1,2, Muhammad Pradhiki Mahindra3,4, Mirani Ulfa Yusrika1
1Indonesian Prenatal Institute, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Insights
The Indonesian Prenatal Institute (IPI) model shows comparable performance to the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) model and outperforms the Maternal and Children Health Handbook (MCH-HB) model for predicting preeclampsia (PE). This finding aids in selecting effective PE screening tools.
Area of Science:
- Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Maternal-Fetal Medicine
- Public Health
Background:
- Preeclampsia (PE) poses significant risks to maternal and fetal well-being.
- Accurate prediction models are crucial for timely intervention and improved outcomes.
- Existing models like FMF, MCH-HB, and IPI require comparative evaluation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the predictive performance of three distinct models for preeclampsia (PE).
- To evaluate the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF), Indonesian Maternal and Children Health Handbook (MCH-HB), and Indonesian Prenatal Institute (IPI) algorithms.
- To assess model efficacy across different PE classifications (all, early-onset, preterm).
Main Methods:
- Maternal risk factors, biophysical, and biochemical markers were collected at 11-14 weeks gestation.
- Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was employed.
- Detection rates (DR) at a 10% false-positive rate (FPR) were compared across models.
Main Results:
- For all PE, IPI (66.9%) and FMF (62.9%) showed higher DR than MCH-HB (50.0%) at 10% FPR.
- For early-onset PE, IPI (81.5%) and FMF (80.3%) outperformed MCH-HB (71.4%).
- For preterm PE, IPI (66.9%) and FMF (70.2%) demonstrated superior DR compared to MCH-HB (38.5%).
Conclusions:
- The IPI algorithm demonstrates predictive performance comparable to the FMF model.
- The IPI model significantly outperforms the MCH-HB model for predicting all, early-onset, and preterm PE.
- These findings support the utility of the IPI algorithm in PE screening protocols.
Introduction:
This study aimed to compare Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF), Indonesian Maternal and Children Health Handbook (MCH-HB), and Indonesian Prenatal Institute (IPI) models for predicting PE.
Materials/Subjects And Methods:
Maternal risk factors, biophysical, and biochemical markers were recorded from women screened for PE at 11-14 gestational weeks. The receiving operator curve (ROC) analysis was used to compare the detection rate (DR) among prediction models.
Results:
For all PE at a 10% false-positive rate (FPR), FMF had a DR 62.9%; MCH-HB had a DR 50.0%; IPI had a DR 66.9%. For early-onset PE, at 10% FPR FMF had a DR 80.3%; MCH-HB had a DR 71.4%; IPI had a DR 81.5%. For preterm PE at 10% FPR, FMF had a DR 70.2%; MCH-HB had a DR 38.5%; IPI had a DR 66.9%.
Discussion:
IPI algorithm is comparable to FMF and outperforms MCH-HB algorithm for all, early-onset, and preterm PE screening.
