ArticlePloS one2023
Ultrasonographic cervical length screening at 20-24 weeks of gestation in twin pregnancies for prediction of spontaneous preterm birth: A 10-year Taiwanese cohort.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Late Cervical Shortening following Midtrimester Screening: Associations with Obstetric History and Risk of Preterm Birth.Gynecologic and obstetric investigation · 2026Article
- Spectrum of Cervical Insufficiency: Management Strategies from Asymptomatic Shortening to Emergent Membrane Prolapse.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Assessment of novel sonographic and biochemical tools for spontaneous preterm birth prediction in asymptomatic twin pregnancies.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShortened cervical length is one of the primary predictors for spontaneous preterm deliveries in twin pregnancies. However, there is lack of consensus regarding cut-off values. Recent evidence highlights that established cut-offs for cervical length screening might not always apply across different populations. This study aims to present the distribution of cervical length in Taiwanese twin pregnancies and to assess its predictive value for spontaneous preterm birth during mid-trimester screening. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective analysis of cervical length screening in Taiwan evaluated 469 twin pregnancies between 20-24 weeks of gestation. Outcome data were obtained directly from the medical records of the delivery hospital. The study explored the predictive value of cervical length screening for spontaneous preterm birth and the characteristics of cervical length distribution in Taiwanese twin pregnancies.
resultsThe average gestational age at screening was 22.7 weeks. Cervical length values displayed a non-normal distribution (p-value <0.001). The median, 5th and 95th centiles were 37.5 mm 25.1 mm, and 47.9 mm, respectively. Various cut-off values were assessed using different methods, yielding positive [negative] likelihood ratios for spontaneous preterm births between 32-37 weeks of gestational age (GA) (1.3-30.1 and [0.51-0.92]) and for very preterm births between 28-32 weeks GA (5.6-51.1 and [0.45-0.64]).
conclusionsThe findings from our analysis of Taiwanese twin pregnancies uphold the moderate predictive potential of cervical length screening, consistent with prior investigations. The presented likelihood ratios for predicting preterm birth at different gestational ages equip clinicians with valuable tools to enhance their diagnostic rationale and resource utilization. By fine-tuning screening parameters according to the spontaneous preterm birth prevalence and clinical priorities of the particular population, healthcare providers can enhance patient care. Our data implies that a cervical length below 20 mm might provide an optimal balance between minimizing false negatives and managing false positives when predicting spontaneous preterm birth.
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.