ArticlePloS one2025
Defining high-risk pregnancy: Protocol for a systematic scoping review of clinical determinants, complications, and adverse birth outcomes.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Postpartum Depression in High-Risk Pregnancies: Findings from a Telepsychiatry-Based Longitudinal Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Temporal trend and influencing factors of high-risk pregnancy in China: a nationwide longitudinal analysis.Frontiers in public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAccurately identifying clinical determinants within the medical paradigm is essential for evidence-based planning and management of high-risk pregnancies, and for preventing adverse birth outcomes through targeted interventions. However, a systematic synthesis of regional classification systems, risk factors, complications, and adverse birth outcomes associated with high-risk pregnancies remains lacking.
objectiveThis study protocol aims to systematically identify relevant published research, assess the risks of bias, and summarize the routinely collected clinical determinants/data used in classifying high-risk pregnancy status and the relationship of this status with its complications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The bibliographic databases of Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, SCOPUS, and PubMed-MEDLINE will be searched for observational studies without language restrictions. The two-stage screening process will be conducted, involving independent full-text reviews, risk of bias assessments, and data extraction by two reviewers. Narrative synthesis will address selective publication bias using established critical appraisal and evidence evaluation methods. Study selection and reporting will adhere to the PRISMA-P guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required, as this systematic review utilises only published data. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at conferences. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO database registration (registration number: CRD420251026327).
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.