ArticleImmunity, inflammation and disease2025
Analysis of Treatment and Subsequent Pregnancy Outcomes in Patients With Antinuclear Antibody-Positive Recurrent Spontaneous Abortion.
Article in Immunity, inflammation and disease, 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.
- Novel Clinically Validated Machine Learning Model for Early Pregnancy Loss in Recurrent Spontaneous Abortion: Integrating Serum Autoantibodies and Ultrasonic Parameters.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe etiology of recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA) has not been clearly defined. The role of autoantibodies in RSA has particularly attracted much attention.
objectiveA retrospective analysis was performed to explore the combinatory efficacy of five drugs (aspirin enteric-coated tablets, hydroxychloroquine sulfate, methylprednisolone tablets, calcitriol capsules, and vitamin D calcium) in treating RSA patients with antinuclear antibody (ANA)-positive but could not be diagnosed with autoimmune diseases (AID) through assessment of treatment-related impact on subsequent pregnancy outcomes and adverse reactions. METHOD OF THE STUDY: Patients who took medication regularly were defined as the observation group (125 cases), and patients who did not take medication or took medication less than 1 month as the control group (86 cases). According to the ANA titer, patients were further divided into subgroups of 1:100, 1:320, and 1:1000, respectively.
resultsComparison of the observation and the control groups without ANA subgrouping showed that the live birth rate in the observation group was higher (odds ratio 3.312, p < 0.001), and the miscarriage rate was lower than that of the control group (odds ratio 0.302, p < 0.001). Statistically significant results were obtained in ANA titer 1:100 subgrouping (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the observation groups and the control groups for the ANA titers 1:320 and 1:1000. No statistically significant differences were observed in pregnancy rate, birthweight, neonatal 1-min Apgar score, and incidence of pregnancy complications between the observation and the control groups. Besides, the treatment showed a low incidence of adverse effects.
conclusionIn summary, RSA patients who are ANA positive (titer 1:100) but not yet diagnosed as AID can have improved pregnancy outcomes after treatment.
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.