ArticleMaternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)2025
Multicenter Retrospective Evaluation of the Chinese Expert Consensus Scoring System for the Diagnosis of Obstetrical DIC.
Article in Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy and clinical application of the Obstetrical Chinese Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC) Scoring System (OCDSS). Methods: This study is a retrospective study that collected 1063 cases from Wuhan Union Hospital, Yichang Central People's Hospital, and the Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture between July 2017 and June 2024. These cases were divided into DIC and non-DIC groups based on score standard. Diagnosis of DIC, the rate of hysterectomy, neonatal mortality, and severe asphyxia are the main outcome measures. All the laboratory indicators are all determined by clinical laboratory department of the hospital. Data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range) and frequencies. Independent sample Results: Of 1063 participants in this study, 29 participants (2.73%) were diagnosed with obstetrical DIC by OCDSS score standard, and all the participants were diagnosed as DIC with underlying disease. When the Takao, Clark, and Erez score standard is the "gold standard", the OCDSS score standard always shows good sensitivity and specificity, with all the AUC over 0.75. OCDSS score standard also has better predictive of hysterectomy (68.18%, 91.07%, 0.872), severe neonatal asphyxia and death (79.17%, 75.07%, 0.842) than the other three score standards. All the indicators included in the OCDSS score standard contributed to the DIC diagnosis (all the Conclusion: OCDSS is a first score standard, especially for pregnancies, it considers the underlying disease, clinical symptoms, and laboratory results. This score system shared a good diagnosis performance for DIC in the Chinese population and may help clinicians make timely decisions.
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.