SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2024
Predictors of successful expectant and medical management of miscarriage: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictors of successful expectant and medical management of miscarriage: A systematic review.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of Therapist-Guided Versus Self-Guided Internet-Based Stress Inoculation Therapy (ISIT) on Psychological Distress Symptoms in Women After Miscarriage in Iran: A Study Protocol of a Randomized Clinical Trial.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Is a history of cesarean section a predictive factor for the failure of medical management in spontaneous abortion?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
introduction15.3% of pregnancies result in miscarriage, management options include expectant, medical, or surgical. However, each patient has a range of variables, which makes navigating the available literature challenging when supporting individual patient decision-making. This systematic review aims to investigate whether there are any specific predictors for miscarriage management outcome. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe following databases were searched, from the start of each database up to April 2023: PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria were studies interrogating defined predictors for expectant or medical management of miscarriage success. Exclusion criteria were poor quality, review articles, trial protocols, and congress abstracts. Data collection was carried as per PRISMA guidelines. Quality assessment for each study was assessed using the QUIPS proforma.
resultsRelevant predictors include demographics, ultrasound features, presenting symptoms, and biochemical markers. Across the 24 studies there is heterogeneity in miscarriage definition, predictors reported, and management outcomes used. Associations with certain variables and miscarriage management outcomes are described. Ten studies assessed the impact of miscarriage type on expectant and/or medical management. The majority found that a diagnosis of incomplete miscarriage had a higher success rate following expectant or medical management compared to missed miscarriage or anembryonic pregnancy.
conclusionsWe conclude that there is evidence supporting the possibility to offer personalized miscarriage management advice with case specific predictors. Further larger studies with consistent definitions of predictors, management, and outcomes are needed in order to better support women through the decision-making of miscarriage management.
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.