ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine2015
Genetic considerations in recurrent pregnancy loss.
Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
64 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Fetal genetic factors in pregnancy loss: Insights from a meta-analysis and effectiveness of whole exome sequencing.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- A meta-analysis for association of eNOS VNTR 4b/a, - 786 T > C and + 894G > T polymorphisms with risk of recurrent pregnancy loss.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2021Pooled it
- Assessing the efficacy and safety of SildenafilJournal of medicine and life · 2023Trial
- Unexplained Recurrent Pregnancy Loss and Emerging Endometrial Biology: A Clinically Oriented Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Spectrum of constitutional chromosomal disorders: A five-year retrospective analysis from a tertiary care center in Karachi.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Miscarriage and the Microbiome: Host Genetics, Immunity, and the Reproductive Tract Ecosystem.Genes · 2026Review
- Genetic Variants in Recurrent Euploid Pregnancy Loss.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Association study ofTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2025Article
- Integrated Analysis of WES and scRNA-Seq Data Reveals the Genetic Basis of Immune Dysregulation in Unexplained Recurrent Pregnancy Loss.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- Incidence of miscarriages in women with children with 47,XXY, 48,XXXY, or 49,XXXXY.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Comparing surface immune markers in successful and non-viable ART pregnancies on the day of hCG measurement: a prospective pilot study.Reproduction & fertility · 2025Article
- Genetic landscape of thrombophilia in recurrent miscarriages.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2024Article
- Evolutionary Patterns of Maternal Recognition of Pregnancy and Implantation in Eutherian Mammals.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Post-implantation analysis of genomic variations in the progeny from developing fetus to birth.Human genomics · 2024Article
- Relationship Between Recurrent Pregnancy Loss With Unknown Etiology and Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress.Cureus · 2024Article
- Detection of human platelets antigen polymorphism (HPA-1 and HPA-3) and human factor XIII mutation in Sudanese women with recurrent pregnancy loss.BMC research notes · 2024Article
- Review
- From bench to in silico and backwards: What have we done on genetics of recurrent pregnancy loss and implantation failure and where should we go next?Genetics and molecular biology · 2024Article
- To Test or Not to Test: Routine Thrombophilia Diagnostic Screening of Women with Reproductive Failures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Essential genes: a cross-species perspective.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2023Review
4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human reproduction is remarkably inefficient; nearly 70% of human conceptions do not survive to live birth. Spontaneous fetal aneuploidy is the most common cause for spontaneous loss, particularly in the first trimester of pregnancy. Although losses owing to de novo fetal aneuploidy occur at similar frequencies among women with sporadic and recurrent losses, some couples with recurrent pregnancy loss have additional associated genetic factors and some have nongenetic etiologies. Genetic testing of the products of conception from couples experiencing two or more losses may aid in defining the underlying etiology and in counseling patients about prognosis in a subsequent pregnancy. Parental karyotyping of couples who have experienced recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) will detect some couples with an increased likelihood of recurrent fetal aneuploidy; this may direct interventions. The utility of preimplantation genetic analysis in couples with RPL is unproven, but new approaches to this testing show great promise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.