ArticleCureus2022
Cerebroplacental Ratio Versus Nonstress Test in Predicting Adverse Perinatal Outcomes in Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy of different ultrasound Doppler parameters in predicting adverse fetal outcomes in pregnancies with hypertensive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Nomogram for predicting adverse perinatal outcomes in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy complicated by fetal growth restriction.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Prediction of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with pre-eclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn developing countries, nonstress test (NST) is the most widely used method for antenatal fetal surveillance.Lately, cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) has emerged as a predictor for adverse perinatal outcomes, especially in hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (HDP). Against this background, the present study was conducted with the primary objective of quantifying the diagnostic accuracy of cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) versus nonstress test (NST) in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes in women with HDP.
methodsThis was a prospective observational cohort study conducted in a tertiary care institute in eastern India. All consecutive women with hypertension in pregnancy at a gestational age of ≥32 weeks were recruited into the study. Both CPR and NST were performed at baseline and repeated weekly till delivery. The parameters obtained within one week of delivery were entered for analysis.
resultsSixty-two of the 65 women completed the study. There were 22 women (35.5%) in group A (both CPR and NST normal), 17 (27.4%) in group B (CPR abnormal, NST normal), 14 (22.6%) in group C (CPR normal and NST abnormal), and nine (14.5%) in group D (both CPR and NST abnormal). CPR had greater sensitivity (93.33% versus 46.67%), with higher positive predictive value (53.85% versus 30.43%), specificity (74.47% versus 65.91%), and negative predictive value (97.22% versus 79.49%) than NST for predicting neonatal intensive care unit admission. CPR also had higher sensitivity (84.62% versus 61.54%) and specificity (91.34% versus 69.39%) than NST in predicting neonatal complications. The negative predictive value (NPV) of CPR was 100% for predicting requirement of bag and mask ventilation and continuous positive airway pressure.
conclusionCPR had greater diagnostic accuracy in terms of both higher sensitivity and greater specificity than NST in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes in women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.
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.