ArticleJournal of perinatal medicine2025
Evaluation of fetal growth and birth weight in pregnancies with placenta previa with and without placenta accreta spectrum.
Article in Journal of perinatal medicine, 2025. 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.
- Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes of Abnormal Placental Localization:Saudi medical journal · 2026Article
- Pathophysiology and Management of Placenta Accreta Spectrum.Journal of developmental biology · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe evaluated fetal growth and birthweight in pregnancies with placenta previa with and without placenta accreta spectrum (PAS).
methodsWe retrospectively studied pregnant patients with placenta previa with or without PAS diagnosed at 20-37 weeks' gestation. Estimated fetal weight (EFW) percentile and fetal growth rate were calculated based on ultrasound at two timepoints: 20-24 and 30-34-weeks' gestation. Fetuses were small (SGA) or large for gestational age (LGA) when EFW or abdominal circumference was <10th or >90th percentile for gestational age, respectively. Fetal growth rate was estimated by subtracting EFW percentiles from the two ultrasounds. Birthweight in grams and percentiles were estimated via Anderson and INTERGROWTH-21 standards adjusted for neonatal sex. EFW percentiles, fetal growth rate, birth weight and birthweight percentiles were compared between patients with placenta previa with and without PAS.
resultsWe studied 171 patients with and 146 patients without PAS. SGA rates did not differ between groups on first (PAS n=3, no-PAS n=3, p=0.8) or second ultrasound (PAS n=10, no-PAS n=8, p=0.8). LGA rates were similar between groups on first (PAS n=11, no-PAS n=9, p=0.8) and second ultrasound (PAS n=20, no-PAS n=12, p=0.6). The growth rate was higher in fetuses with PAS than placenta previa (1.22 ± 22.3 vs. -4.1 ± 18.1, p=0.07), but not significantly. The birthweight percentile was higher in the PAS than the placenta previa group (74 vs. 67, p=0.01). On multi-linear regression, birthweight percentile remained higher in the PAS group, but not significantly.
conclusionsPlacenta previa with or without PAS is not associated with SGA, LGA or lower birthweight.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39428759What 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.