ArticleThe journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research2025
Antenatal corticosteroid treatment for women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: A population-based study in Japan.
Article in The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facility-Level Factors Associating Antenatal Corticosteroid Administration Rates and Subsequent Term Birth Rates: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Observational Study Using the 2020-2022 Perinatal Registry Database in Japan.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2026Observational
- Antenatal corticosteroid treatment for women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: A population-based study in Japan.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2025Article
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
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to evaluate the current antenatal corticosteroid (ACS) treatment practices for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) in Japan, by evaluating annual trends and identifying clinical disparities and factors influencing non-administration of ACS.
methodsThis retrospective population-based study was conducted using the Japanese Perinatal Research Network Database from 2013 to 2022. We analyzed ACS administration rates over time, across facility types, and the timing of delivery. Factors influencing non-administration were identified using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.
resultsACS administration rates among patients with HDP nearly doubled over the past decade, reaching 64.0% in 2022. Approximately 70% of patients with HDP who received ACS delivered before 34 weeks of gestation; however, only 30% achieved the optimal administration-to-birth interval of 48 h to 7 days. ACS administration rates in patients with HDP differed by facility type: 67.8% (1641/2419) in general perinatal medical centers, 60.5% (1107/1830) in regional perinatal medical centers, and 39.7% (23/58) in non-perinatal medical centers. Factors contributing to non-administration included smoking during pregnancy, eclampsia, placental abruption, HELLP syndrome, regional perinatal medical centers, non-perinatal medical centers, and gestational hypertension. Conversely, conditions such as fetal growth restriction, threatened preterm labor, and preterm premature rupture of membranes were associated with higher rates of ACS administration.
conclusionsAlthough ACS administration rates in patients with HDP have improved over time, challenges remain in achieving optimal administration timing and addressing facility-based disparities. To improve administration rates, clinicians should increase awareness of ACS treatment and proactively manage HDP-related emergencies.
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.