ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2024
Risk factors for cardiovascular disease in women with preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify the risk factors for cardiovascular disease in women with pre-eclampsia and intrauterine growth retardation. Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted in Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Liaquat University Hospital, Hyderabad, from April 2022 to October 2022. Patients with history of intrauterine growth retardation or preeclampsia after 20 weeks of gestation, age more than 18 years were included in this study. Patients were assessed for cardiovascular risk factors during pregnancy. Results: The average age and gestational age were almost equal in preeclampsia and IUGR patients, (p≤0.050). The primparous were higher in preeclampsia than IUGR, n=286 (73.5%) and n=80 (52.3%), respectively, (p=0.000). The average birth weight of IUGR was lower than preeclampsia patients, 925.19±6.35 gram and 1324.76±10.19 gram, respectively, (p=0.000). The average systolic and diastolic blood pressure of IUGR patients was less than preeclampsia patients, (p=0.000). But, the chronic hypertension was higher in preeclampsia patients n=99 (25.4%) as compare to IUGR n=13 (8.5%) patients, (p=0.000). The average cholesterol level in IUGR was 5.52±0.58(mmol/L) versus preeclampsia 5.34±1.01(mmol/L), (p=0.043). The average triglycerides was almost equal in both the groups, (p=0.924). The mean Lp(a) in preeclampsia patients was 177.15±20.15(mg/L) versus 202.94±24.83 (mg/L), (p=0.000). Conclusion: Findings of this study help conclude that women with known history of IUGR or preeclampsia must be screened for possible cardiovascular risk factors and treated for these risk factors in order to avoid future mortality and morbidity associated with cardiovascular diseases.
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.