Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19019223›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2008

Study protocol. A prospective cohort study of unselected primiparous women: the pregnancy outcome prediction study.

Dharmintra Pasupathy, Alison Dacey, Emma Cook, D Stephen Charnock-Jones, Ian R White, Gordon C S Smith

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dharmintra PasupathyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. dp349@cam.ac.uk
Alison Dacey
Emma Cook
D Stephen Charnock-Jones
Ian R White
Gordon C S Smith
University of Cambridge · GBMRC Biostatistics Unit · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0600469Medical Research Council MC_U105260558Medical Research Council U.1052.00.006.00001.01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere have been dramatic changes in the approach to screening for aneuploidy over the last 20 years. However, the approach to screening for other complications of pregnancy such as intra-uterine growth restriction, pre-eclampsia and stillbirth remains largely unchanged. Randomised controlled trials of routine application of high tech screening methods to the general population have generally failed to show improvement in outcome. We have previously reviewed this and concluded it was due, in large part, to poor performance of screening tests. Here, we report a study design where the primary aim is to generate clinically useful methods to screen women to assess their risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. METHODS/

designWe report the design of a prospective cohort study of unselected primiparous women recruited at the time of their first ultrasound scan. Participation involves serial phlebotomy and obstetric ultrasound at the dating ultrasound scan (typically 10-14 weeks), 20 weeks, 28 weeks and 36 weeks gestation. In addition, maternal demographic details are obtained; maternal and paternal height are measured and maternal weight is serially measured during the pregnancy; maternal, paternal and offspring DNA are collected; and, samples of placenta and membranes are collected at birth. Data will be analysed as a prospective cohort study, a case-cohort study, and a nested case-control study. DISCUSSION: The study is expected to provide a resource for the identification of novel biomarkers for adverse pregnancy outcome and to evaluate the performance of biomarkers and serial ultrasonography in providing clinically useful prediction of risk.

Indexed as

BiomarkersDNAFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInfant, NewbornParityPredictive Value of TestsPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnancy OutcomePregnancy TrimestersPrenatal CarePrevalenceProspective StudiesUltrasonography, PrenatalBiomarkersDNA

Identifiers

PMID19019223
PMCPMC2611961
OpenAlexW1966508800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.