ArticleCureus2024
Consensus Statements for Assessment and Management of Threatened Miscarriage in the First Trimester in Pakistan: A Three-Step Modified Delphi Approach.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveIt aimed to develop an expert consensus regarding the risk assessment, diagnosis, and threatened miscarriage management during the first trimester in Pakistan.
methodsA three-step modified Delphi method was applied to develop the consensus. Eleven specialized obstetricians and gynecologists participated in its development. If 75% or higher agreement level was attained on each assertion, it was declared as a consensus.
resultsAge of 35 or above, previous history of two or more previous miscarriages, and direct strong trauma were considered to be threatened miscarriage risk factors. Infection was discussed and specified to include specific infectious diseases, like malaria, and COVID-19 as a risk factor. The experts agreed from the first time on considering endocrinological disorders, thrombophilia, and lifestyle variables as threatened miscarriage risk factors. They proposed adding a statement concerning acquired thrombophilia which was accepted unanimously. Finally, experts agreed on the importance of educating pregnant women about factors whose risk can be modified by modifying their behavior. As for diagnosis statements, it was agreed to be trifold: physical examination, imaging, and laboratory testing. Physical examination included abdominal and pelvic exams but focused more on vaginal examination with speculum to identify bleeding severity and etiology. The statements regarding the imaging approaches to diagnose threatened miscarriage in the first trimester achieved a consensus in most statements. TVS was recommended to check on uterine structural abnormalities, fetus viability focusing on heartbeat and crown-to-rump length, gestation sac size and emptiness, subchorionic hematoma, and ectopic pregnancy. Each was defined on how to identify and diagnose in separate statements. Statements about laboratory tests indicated the need for human chorionic gonadotropin hormone assessment whether serial or once is dependent on the ultrasound. Recommended hematologic investigations include complete blood count for anemia, Rh factor for potential bleeding risk and in special cases, thrombophilia assessment is undertaken. The first and foremost management aspect was follow-up while most management statements were controversial, and some were altogether removed with only some reaching agreement after discussion.
conclusionThese consensus statements aggregated the best available evidence and experts' opinion-supported statements to improve patient education, risk assessment, diagnosis, and evaluation as well as management of threatened miscarriage during the first trimester in Pakistan.
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.