ArticleObstetrics & gynecology science2020
Evaluation of maternal rhesus blood type as a risk factor in adverse pregnancy outcomes in Korea: a nationwide health insurance database study.
Article in Obstetrics & gynecology science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse perinatal outcomes indicative of RhD-mediated hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn in Eastern Ethiopia: evidence of maternal health inequity in a multicenter cohort study.AJOG global reports · 2026Article
- Risk of Abortion and Ectopic Pregnancy in Women with a History of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe current study aimed to investigate whether pregnancy outcomes are affected by maternal rhesus (Rh) status by comparing the primigravida pregnancy outcomes of Rh-negative women with those of Rh-positive women.
methodsThe study data were collected from the Korea National Health Insurance Claims Database and the National Health Screening Program for Infants and Children. In total, 1,664,882 primigravida women who gave birth between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2014, were enrolled in this study. As the risk and severity of sensitization response increases with each subsequent pregnancy, only primigravida women were enrolled. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to Rh status, and the pregnancy outcomes were compared.
resultsIn total, 1,661,320 women in the Rh-positive group and 3,290 in the Rh-negative group were assessed. With regard to adverse pregnancy outcomes, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of the prevalence of preeclampsia, postpartum hemorrhage, abruptio placenta, placenta previa, and uterine artery embolization. A univariate analysis revealed that none of the adverse pregnancy outcomes were significantly correlated to Rh status (preeclampsia: odds ratio [OR], 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.23; postpartum hemorrhage: OR, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.98-1.24; abruptio placenta: OR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.46-1.37; and placenta previa: OR, 1.08, 95% CI, 0.78-1.42). The adjusted ORs of postpartum hemorrhage and preterm birth did not significantly differ.
conclusionMaternal Rh status is not associated with adverse outcomes in primigravida women.
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.