Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40459441›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in obstetrics & gynecology2025

Novel biomarkers for preeclampsia: Promises and pitfalls.

Rachel L Wiley, Minhazur R Sarker, Douglas A Woelkers

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Circulating Plasma Syncytin-1 mRNA in Preeclampsia-A Pilot Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Rachel L WileyDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Minhazur R Sarker
Douglas A Woelkers

Funding

TRAINING IN REPRODUCTIVE SCIENCEST32HD007203 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI PAMELA L MELLON · 1988 to 2026
$4.8M
NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007203
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAdvances in the understanding of preeclampsia are reshaping recognition of the disease and forcing reappraisal of traditional clinical definitions. Historically, the diagnosis of preeclampsia relied on nonspecific criteria not rooted in the biology of the disease. Efforts to refine these criteria led to diagnostic expansion and clinical uncertainty, creating challenges for prediction, treatment, and management. Recently available preeclampsia biomarkers offer the promise of more accurate diagnosis and risk stratification. The purpose of this review is to provide physiologic context for preeclampsia biomarkers, to summarize clinical performance, and to highlight gaps in knowledge that may hinder adoption. RECENT

findingsOver the past decade, several preeclampsia biomarkers have been proposed, primarily angiogenic and anti-angiogenic factors that modulate placental and maternal vascular growth and adaptation. The recent availability of rapid and precise laboratory assays has allowed researchers to demonstrate high diagnostic concordance with the syndrome of preeclampsia, and superior prediction of adverse outcomes as compared with traditional clinical criteria. Nonetheless, widespread implementation remains in its early stages because of the absence of validated intervention pathways. SUMMARY: This review provides an update of the most promising diagnostic advances in preeclampsia, highlighting both their potential benefits and the challenges of redefining the disease with biomarkers.

Indexed as

BiomarkersPre-EclampsiaFemaleHumansPlacentaPlacenta Growth FactorPregnancyBiomarkersPlacenta Growth Factorangiogenicbiomarkersgestational hypertensionpreeclampsiapreeclampsia screening

Identifiers

PMID40459441
PMCPMC12357534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.