ArticleJournal of ultrasound2023
Sensitivity of uterine artery Doppler pulsatility index in screening for adverse pregnancy outcome in first and second trimesters.
Article in Journal of ultrasound, 2023. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel Clinically Validated Machine Learning Model for Early Pregnancy Loss in Recurrent Spontaneous Abortion: Integrating Serum Autoantibodies and Ultrasonic Parameters.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- First- and Second-Trimester Uterine Artery Doppler and Hypertensive Disorders in Twin Pregnancies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Prevention of Pre-Eclampsia: Modern Strategies and the Role of Early Screening.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Analysis of the uterine artery pulsatility index on the day of endometrial transformation and pregnancy outcomes of patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
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
purposeIn a poor resource country where screening for adverse pregnancy outcomes using maternal biomarkers seems unattainable, there is a need to search for credible alternatives. This study is, therefore, aimed at determining the sensitivity of uterine artery Doppler pulsatility index (UtAD-PI) in predicting pregnancy outcomes in the first and second trimesters and to establish any statistical difference in mean UtAD-PI in first and second trimesters screening of women with normal and abnormal pregnancy outcomes respectively.
methodsThis clinical-based, longitudinal, and unpaired cohort study involved 500 pregnant women, who were screened for adverse outcomes using UtAD-PI and delivered in the hospital. These were divided into two groups, each having a training set and a test set. The training set was used to generate the receiver operator characteristic curve and cut-off point while the test set was used to test for sensitivity and specificity of the Ut-ADI in each trimester.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity of UtAD-PI in first-trimester screening are 97% and 76.5% while second-trimester gave sensitivity and specificity of 57.5% and 63.3% respectively. The uterine artery Doppler pulsatility index shows statistically significant differences between normal pregnancy and pregnancy with adverse outcomes (p-value = 0.000).
conclusionThe uterine artery Doppler pulsatility index is a good screening tool for adverse pregnancy outcomes. First-trimester screening of patients for adverse outcomes is more sensitive than the second-trimester screening using UtAD-PI. There is also a statistically significant difference between mean UtAD-PI between normal pregnancy and pregnancy with adverse pregnancy outcomes.
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.