SynthesisThe Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism2024
Defining Gestational Thyroid Dysfunction Through Modified Nonpregnancy Reference Intervals: An Individual Participant Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 2024. 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.
- Pregnancy-specific Reference Intervals for TSH and FT4: Novel Insights From Preconception-gestation Longitudinal Data.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Article
- Global and Indian perspectives on trimester-specific reference intervals for thyroid hormones in pregnant women: a systematic review.Thyroid research · 2026Review
- Canadian Endocrinologists' Perspectives on Treatment With Thyroid Hormone Substitutions in Euthyroid and Hypothyroid Patients: A 2023 THESIS Questionnaire Survey.Clinical endocrinology · 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
36 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEstablishing local trimester-specific reference intervals for gestational TSH and free T4 (FT4) is often not feasible, necessitating alternative strategies. We aimed to systematically quantify the diagnostic performance of standardized modifications of center-specific nonpregnancy reference intervals as compared to trimester-specific reference intervals.
methodsWe included prospective cohorts participating in the Consortium on Thyroid and Pregnancy. After relevant exclusions, reference intervals were calculated per cohort in thyroperoxidase antibody-negative women. Modifications to the nonpregnancy reference intervals included an absolute modification (per .1 mU/L TSH or 1 pmol/L free T4), relative modification (in steps of 5%) and fixed limits (upper TSH limit between 3.0 and 4.5 mU/L and lower FT4 limit 5-15 pmol/L). We compared (sub)clinical hypothyroidism prevalence, sensitivity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of these methodologies with population-based trimester-specific reference intervals.
resultsThe final study population comprised 52 496 participants in 18 cohorts. Optimal modifications of standard reference intervals to diagnose gestational overt hypothyroidism were -5% for the upper limit of TSH and +5% for the lower limit of FT4 (sensitivity, .70, CI, 0.47-0.86; PPV, 0.64, CI, 0.54-0.74). For subclinical hypothyroidism, these were -20% for the upper limit of TSH and -15% for the lower limit of FT4 (sensitivity, 0.91; CI, 0.67-0.98; PPV, 0.71, CI, 0.58-0.80). Absolute and fixed modifications yielded similar results. CIs were wide, limiting generalizability.
conclusionWe could not identify modifications of nonpregnancy TSH and FT4 reference intervals that would enable centers to adequately approximate trimester-specific reference intervals. Future efforts should be turned toward studying the meaningfulness of trimester-specific reference intervals and risk-based decision limits.
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.