SynthesisBMJ open2025
Comparative effectiveness and safety of nifedipine and magnesium sulfate as treatment options for preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPreterm birth (PTB) is a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Effective use of tocolytic agents may improve perinatal outcomes. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of nifedipine and magnesium sulfate in the treatment of PTB.
designA systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, WanFang, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched from inception to 1 December 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compare the efficacy and safety of magnesium sulfate versus nifedipine in treating PTB. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two researchers independently screened studies and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool for RCTs and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomised studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager V.5.4.
resultsIn all, 50 articles were included in this review, comprising 6072 cases (n=3014 for the magnesium sulfate group; n=3058 for the nifedipine group). Compared with the magnesium sulfate group, the nifedipine group was more favourable in terms of time to onset of action and prolongation of days of gestation, as well as higher neonatal 1 min Apgar scores. The use of magnesium sulfate was associated with a higher incidence of maternal side effects, specifically tachycardia, flushing, palpitations, dizziness and nausea. In addition, the magnesium sulfate group also showed a higher incidence of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome than the nifedipine group.
conclusionCompared with magnesium sulfate, nifedipine is more effective with a faster onset of action and a longer prolonging pregnancy. Additionally, nifedipine may be safer for fewer maternal side effects and better neonatal outcomes. Further studies are needed to confirm the long-term safety and efficacy of these treatments.
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.