This retrospective real-world study investigated the clinical use of the sFlt-1 (soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1)/PlGF (placental growth factor) ratio alone or in combination with other clinical tests to predict an adverse maternal (maternal death, kidney failure, hemolysis elevated liver enzymes low platelets-syndrome, pulmonary edema, disseminated intravascular coagulation, cerebral hemorrhage, or eclampsia) or fetal (delivery before 34 weeks because of preeclampsia and/or intrauterine growth restriction, respiratory distress syndrome, necrotizing enterocolitis, intraventricular hemorrhage, placental abruption or intrauterine fetal death or neonatal death within 7 days post natum) pregnancy outcome in patients with signs and symptoms of preeclampsia. We evaluated the sFlt-1/PlGF-ratio cutoff values of 38 and 85 and evaluated its integration into a multimarker model. Of 1117 subjects, 322 (28.8%) developed an adverse fetal or maternal outcome. Patients with an adverse versus no adverse outcome had a median sFlt-1/PlGF-ratio of 177 (interquartile range, 54–362) versus 14 (4–64). Risk-stratification with the sFlt-1/PlGF cutoff values into high- (>85), intermediate- (38–85), and low-risk (<38) showed a significantly shorter time to delivery in high- and intermediate- versus low-risk patients (4 versus 8 versus 29 days). When integrating all available clinical information into a multimarker model, an area under the curve of 88.7% corresponding to a sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of 80.0%, 87.3%, 75.0%, and 90.2% was reached. The sFlt-1/PlGF-ratio alone was inferior to the full model with an area under the curve of 85.7%. As expected, blood pressure and proteinuria were significantly less accurate with an area under the curve of 69.0%. Combining biomarker measurements with all available information in a multimarker modeling approach increased detection of adverse outcomes in women with suspected disease.

No abstract

Background Digitalization and the increasing availability of online information have changed the way in which information is searched for and retrieved by the public and by health professionals. The technical developments in the last two decades have transformed the methods of information retrieval. Although systematic evidence exists on the general information needs of specialists, and in particular, family physicians (FPs), there have been no recent systematic reviews to specifically address the needs of FPs and any barriers that may exist to accessing online health information. Objective This review aims to provide an up-to-date perspective on the needs of FPs in searching, retrieving, and using online information. Methods This systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies searched a multitude of databases spanning the years 2000 to 2020 (search date January 2020). Studies that analyzed the online information needs of FPs, any barriers to the accessibility of information, and their information-seeking behaviors were included. Two researchers independently scrutinized titles and abstracts, analyzing full-text papers for their eligibility, the studies therein, and the data obtained from them. Results The initial search yielded 4541 studies for initial title and abstract screening. Of the 144 studies that were found to be eligible for full-text screening, 41 were finally included. A total of 20 themes were developed and summarized into 5 main categories: individual needs of FPs before the search; access needs, including factors that would facilitate or hinder information retrieval; quality needs of the information to hand; utilization needs of the information available; and implication needs for everyday practice. Conclusions This review suggests that searching, accessing, and using online information, as well as any pre-existing needs, barriers, or demands, should not be perceived as separate entities but rather be regarded as a sequential process. Apart from accessing information and evaluating its quality, FPs expressed concerns regarding the applicability of this information to their everyday practice and its subsequent relevance to patient care. Future online information resources should cater to the needs of the primary care setting and seek to address the way in which such resources may be adapted to these specific requirements.

No abstract