ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Evaluation of a two-tier preterm birth prevention service in a tertiary hospital in the United Kingdom: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreterm birth is the most important cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Clinical guidelines recommend assessment of risk of preterm birth and implementation of interventions to reduce preterm birth risk through dedicated preterm birth clinics. We hypothesized that a two-tier preterm birth clinic pathway can safely manage women at the highest risk of preterm birth while reducing intervention for women at moderate risk of preterm birth. We aimed to test this hypothesis by evaluating risk factors, management, and outcomes of women attending a two-tier preterm birth prevention service.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of women who gave birth between January and June 2021 at a tertiary hospital in Oxford, UK. We included two cohorts: women attending a Cervical Screening Clinic and women attending a Preterm Birth Clinic, and we also reviewed all cases of births before 34 weeks over that time period. At the initial midwife appointment at 8-10 weeks' gestation, risk factors for preterm birth were assessed. Pregnant women with moderate risk factors (previous preterm birth at 32
results189 women attended the Cervical Screening Clinic: 79.1% had a moderate risk factor for preterm birth, 100% had a cervical length scan, 7% had a short cervix and 4.2% received an intervention. All 196 infants were live born, with overall preterm birth rates of 14.8% at < 37 weeks, 3.1% at < 32 weeks, and 0% at < 28 weeks. The spontaneous live preterm birth rates were 9.7% at < 37 weeks, 2.6% at < 32 weeks and 0% at < 28 weeks. 79 women attended the Preterm Birth Clinic: 87.3% had a major risk factor for preterm birth, 100% had ≥ 1 cervical length scan, 41.3% had a short cervix, 78.1% received vaginal progesterone, and 39% had a cervical cerclage. Overall preterm birth rates were 33.8% at < 37 weeks, 10.3% at < 32 weeks and 4.4% at < 28 weeks. Spontaneous live preterm birth rates were 22.1% at < 37 weeks, 7.4% at < 32 weeks, and 2.9% at < 28 weeks. 115 women gave birth to 130 babies before 34 weeks: 80% had no major risk factor for preterm birth, 29% had a cervical length scan and less than 15% had an intervention. Over 90% had a live birth, but the neonatal death rate was high (8.5%).
conclusionWomen with moderate risk factors for preterm birth seen in the Cervical Screening Clinic had low rates of intervention and good perinatal outcomes. Most women with major risk factors were appropriately referred and managed by the Preterm Birth Clinic. This two-tier preterm birth prevention service therefore appears safe and effective.
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.