Trial reportInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2025
Cost-effectiveness of a randomized controlled trial comparing low-dose aspirin to placebo for the prevention of recurrent preterm birth.
Trial report in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of a randomized controlled trial comparing low-dose aspirin to placebo for the prevention of recurrent preterm birth.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess the cost-effectiveness of low-dose aspirin compared to placebo for the prevention of recurrent preterm birth from a healthcare perspective. This was a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. We included women with a singleton pregnancy and a previous spontaneous preterm birth <37 weeks of gestation of a singleton. Women were randomized between aspirin 80 mg daily and placebo, initiated between 8 and 16 weeks of gestation. We estimated the difference in preterm births (<37 weeks of gestation), and maternal and neonatal healthcare costs using seemingly unrelated linear regression analyses. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate statistical uncertainty. A total of 387 women were included: 194 in the aspirin group and 193 in the placebo group. We observed a small, statistically non-significant difference in preterm birth (21.2% vs. 25.4%; risk difference -4.3%; 95% CI: -12.7% to 4.1%) and healthcare costs (mean -€99; 95% CI: -€2385 to €2325) in the aspirin group compared to placebo. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that the probability of aspirin being cost-effective was 54% for a willingness to pay threshold of €0 for one prevented preterm birth and 78% for €50 000 for one prevented preterm birth. Our findings suggest that aspirin is the dominant strategy over placebo for the prevention of preterm birth. However, there was substantial uncertainty around the results and definite conclusions regarding the cost-effectiveness of aspirin cannot be drawn.
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.