ArticleThe journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research2025
Early warning systems to predict severe complications during preterm and postpartum: A scoping review.
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 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.
- Early warning systems to predict severe complications during preterm and postpartum: A scoping review.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimEarly warning systems (EWSs) are widely used in obstetric care to predict severe maternal complications, including postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) and sepsis. However, variations in the definitions of both EWS and target conditions hinder direct comparisons and meta-analyses. This scoping review aimed to systematically identify diagnostic accuracy studies evaluating EWS for predicting severe maternal conditions and to explore trends in this field.
methodsThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed and CENTRAL databases was conducted up to July 12, 2024. Eligible studies included diagnostic accuracy studies assessing EWS in obstetric populations. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and summarized study characteristics, including index tests and target conditions.
resultsA total of 93 studies involving 697,558 patients were included. The most frequently evaluated index test was the shock index (SI; 38 studies, 41%), followed by the Modified Early Obstetric Warning Score (19 studies, 20.4%) and the Obstetric Early Warning Score (10 studies, 10.8%). PPH was the most common target condition (46 studies, 49.4%), followed by sepsis (30 studies, 32.3%) and maternal death (21 studies, 22.6%). The combination of SI and PPH was most frequently assessed (20 studies).
conclusionsDespite the widespread adoption of EWS in obstetric care, the marked heterogeneity in both index tests and outcome definitions highlights the need for standardized criteria and further diagnostic research.
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.