Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39449094›Full record

SynthesisBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2025

First-Trimester Prediction Models Based on Maternal Characteristics for Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jacintha C A van Eekhout, Ellis C Becking, Peter G Scheffer, Ioannis Koutsoliakos, Caroline J Bax, Lidewij Henneman, Mireille N Bekker, Ewoud Schuit

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jacintha C A van EekhoutDepartment of Genetics, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8088-6176
Ellis C BeckingDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0418-7880
Peter G SchefferDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9253-5341
Ioannis KoutsoliakosDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Caroline J BaxDepartment of Obstetrics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lidewij HennemanAmsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3531-0597
Mireille N BekkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7372-4291
Ewoud SchuitJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9548-3214

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly risk stratification can facilitate timely interventions for adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preeclampsia (PE), small-for-gestational-age neonates (SGA), spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

objectivesTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of first-trimester prediction models for adverse pregnancy outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: The PubMed database was searched until 6 June 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: First-trimester prediction models based on maternal characteristics were included. Articles reporting on prediction models that comprised biochemical or ultrasound markers were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors identified articles, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and applicability using PROBAST. MAIN

resultsA total of 77 articles were included, comprising 30 developed models for PE, 15 for SGA, 11 for sPTB and 35 for GDM. Discriminatory performance in terms of median area under the curve (AUC) of these models was 0.75 [IQR 0.69-0.78] for PE models, 0.62 [0.60-0.71] for SGA models of nulliparous women, 0.74 [0.72-0.74] for SGA models of multiparous women, 0.65 [0.61-0.67] for sPTB models of nulliparous women, 0.71 [0.68-0.74] for sPTB models of multiparous women and 0.71 [0.67-0.76] for GDM models. Internal validation was performed in 40/91 (43.9%) of the models. Model calibration was reported in 21/91 (23.1%) models. External validation was performed a total of 96 times in 45/91 (49.5%) of the models. High risk of bias was observed in 94.5% of the developed models and in 58.3% of the external validations.

conclusionsMultiple first-trimester prediction models are available, but almost all suffer from high risk of bias, and internal and external validations were often not performed. Hence, methodological quality improvement and assessment of the clinical utility are needed.

Indexed as

Diabetes, GestationalInfant, Small for Gestational AgePre-EclampsiaPregnancy OutcomePregnancy Trimester, FirstFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyPremature BirthRisk Assessmentadverse pregnancy outcomesfirst trimestergestational diabetesprediction modelspreeclampsiarisk stratificationsmall for gestational age neonatesspontaneous preterm birth

Identifiers

PMID39449094
PMCPMC11704081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.