ReviewMinerva ginecologica2015
Prematurity: present and future.
Review in Minerva ginecologica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence and Perspectives for Choline Supplementation during Parenteral Nutrition-A Narrative Review.Nutrients · 2024Review
- Basic biochemical and hematological parameters of structural hemoglobin variants in the postpartum women and their respective newborn from Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Sustained peripheral immune hyper-reactivity (SPIHR): an enduring biomarker of altered inflammatory responses in adult rats after perinatal brain injury.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2021Article
- Choline and choline-related nutrients in regular and preterm infant growth.European journal of nutrition · 2019Review
- Maternal Supplementation of Low Dose Fluoride Alleviates Adverse Perinatal Outcomes Following Exposure to Intrauterine Inflammation.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Pregnancy Outcomes in Men and Women Treated With Teriflunomide. A Population-Based Nationwide Danish Register Study.Frontiers in immunology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study of preterm labor and prematurity has undergone a major transformation in its approach from an inevitable part of obstetrics with few answers to one in which science has led to knowledge and clinical intervention. Despite these advancements, understanding of preterm labor and prevention of prematurity is still limited. In the current review, we begin the discussion with fetal viability, first from a historical perspective and then from the understanding of this issue from a prospective of various professional organizations. We then present the scope of the problem of preterm birth from various countries including the discrepancy between the US and Europe. We continue with updates on extreme prematurity and outcomes with two longitudinal studies from the past 2 years. We further review available interventions for prematurity and discuss the use of antenatal corticosteroids. First, we examine their use in the context of professional recommendations and then examine the trajectory of their continued use in the late preterm period. We focus on a European-based trial with preliminary results and an ongoing American counterpart. The current knowledge of molecular mechanisms behind preterm labor is presented with a focus on the multiple etiologies of preterm labor, both known and presumed, with updates in the basic science realm. Furthermore, we present up-to-date studies on prediction of preterm birth and prematurity-related morbidity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25300768PMC4323881What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.