ArticlePediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology Society
Synoptic Reporting in Clinical Placental Pathology: A Preliminary Investigation Into Report Findings and Interobserver Agreement.
Article in Pediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology Society. 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.
- Perinatal Deaths: Autopsy Findings and Medico-Legal Evaluation from a Forensic Medicine Perspective.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- The Amsterdam Criteria and beyond: development of a Standardized Structured Reporting (SSR) tool for diagnosis of placental pathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Enhancing the utility of placental pathology reports for clinical use.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Standardized Placental Pathology Reporting: Improving Quality and Clinical Utility Recommendations From the Society for Pediatric Pathology Placental Pathology Reporting Task Force.Pediatric and developmental pathology : the official journal of the Society for Pediatric Pathology and the Paediatric Pathology SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPlacental pathology is key for investigating adverse pregnancy outcomes, however, lack of standardization in reporting has limited clinical utility. We evaluated a novel placental pathology synoptic report, comparing its robustness to narrative reports, and assessed interobserver agreement.
methods100 singleton placentas were included. Histology slides were examined by 2 senior perinatal pathologists and 2 pathology residents using a synoptic report (32 lesions). Historical narrative reports were compared to synoptic reports. Kappa scores were calculated for interobserver agreement between senior, resident, and senior vs resident pathologists.
resultsSynoptic reporting detected 169 (51.4%) lesion instances initially not included in historical reports. Amongst senior pathologists, 64% of all lesions examined demonstrated fair-to-excellent agreement (Kappa ≥0.41), with only 26% of Kappas ≥0.41 amongst those examined by resident pathologists. Well-characterized lesions (e.g., chorioamnionitis) demonstrated higher agreement, with lower agreement for uncommon lesions and those previously shown to have poor consensus. DISCUSSION: Synoptic reporting is one proposed method to address issues in placenta pathology reporting. The synoptic report generally identifies more lesions compared to the narrative report, however clinical significance remains unclear. Interobserver agreement is likely related to differential in experience. Further efforts to improve overall standardization of placenta pathology reporting are needed.
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.