ArticleScientific reports2021
Risk score to stratify miscarriage risk levels in preconception women.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Risk and protective factors of miscarriage: Evidence from a nationally representative sample of women in India.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Article
- Modifiable Risk Factor Score and Fecundability in a Preconception Cohort in Singapore.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Dietary Supplement Intake and Fecundability in a Singapore Preconception Cohort Study.Nutrients · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Spontaneous miscarriage is one of the most common complications of pregnancy. Even though some risk factors are well documented, there is a paucity of risk scoring tools during preconception. In the S-PRESTO cohort study, Asian women attempting to conceive, aged 18-45 years, were recruited. Multivariable logistic regression model coefficients were used to determine risk estimates for age, ethnicity, history of pregnancy loss, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol intake and dietary supplement intake; from these we derived a risk score ranging from 0 to 17. Miscarriage before 16 weeks of gestation, determined clinically or via ultrasound. Among 465 included women, 59 had miscarriages and 406 had pregnancy ≥ 16 weeks of gestation. Higher rates of miscarriage were observed at higher risk scores (5.3% at score ≤ 3, 17.0% at score 4-6, 40.0% at score 7-8 and 46.2% at score ≥ 9). Women with scores ≤ 3 were defined as low-risk level (< 10% miscarriage); scores 4-6 as intermediate-risk level (10% to < 40% miscarriage); scores ≥ 7 as high-risk level (≥ 40% miscarriage). The risk score yielded an area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve of 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.67, 0.81; p < 0.001). This novel scoring tool allows women to self-evaluate their miscarriage risk level, which facilitates lifestyle changes to optimize modifiable risk factors in the preconception period and reduces risk of spontaneous miscarriage.
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.