ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
The Etiopathogenesis of Preeclampsia: Where Do We Stand Now?
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improve PINK1/PARKIN-Mediated Mitophagy Inhibition in Preeclampsia.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Article
- Modulation of oxidative stress and angiogenic pathways by natural compounds in experimental preeclampsia: A narrative review focusing on MDA, sFlt-1, and PlGF.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2026Article
- IL-32 as a potential biomarker and therapeutic target in cardiovascular disease.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
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
Preeclampsia is a multisystem disorder that develops during pregnancy and is associated with severe complications for both the pregnant woman and her infant. It remains a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Although it affects only 2-8% of pregnancies, over 70,000 women and 500,000 children die from it each year. The exact etiology of preeclampsia is unclear; it is often referred to as a disease of theories and hypotheses. This paper reviews the most significant hypotheses and studies that aim to explain the etiology of preeclampsia. This may help identify new research paths and concepts that could bring us closer to understanding the exact etiology of preeclampsia. The complexity of pathogenetic relationships and mechanisms, heterogeneous clinical presentations, and the development of underlying changes early in pregnancy when patients are clinically asymptomatic and appear healthy are among the main reasons for difficulty identifying the exact causes of preeclampsia. Furthermore, preeclampsia is specific to human pregnancy; there is no ideal animal study model whose results could be fully extrapolated to humans. A more holistic approach that combines all the information, hypotheses, and pathogenetic relationships may offer hope for understanding why preeclampsia occurs and how to prevent and treat it effectively. A better understanding of the precise etiology of the condition holds promise for developing new options for the early diagnosis, effective prevention, and modern causal treatment of preeclampsia. This would reduce the risk of severe complications in affected patients and could have enormous implications for clinical practice.
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.