Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41454332›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025

Uterine electromyography as a new predictor of extremely preterm birth: a multifactorial model integrating clinical and bioelectrical parameters.

Jing Tang, Tianyuan Qi, Feiyan Li, Haiyan Lin, Xiaohui Ji, Xiaoyan Wang, Jianmei Lai, Chunwei Cao, Liqiong Zhu, Shuai Fu and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Jing Tang *Reproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Tianyuan Qi *Reproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Feiyan Li *Obstetrics and Gynecology department, Dongguan Maternal and Children Health Hospital, Dongguan, China.
Haiyan LinReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Xiaohui JiReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Xiaoyan WangReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Jianmei LaiReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Chunwei CaoReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Liqiong ZhuObstetrics department, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Shuai FuObstetrics department, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yan YuObstetrics and Gynecology department, Shenzhen Baoan Women's and Children's Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Shiyu BaiReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China.
Jianping ZhangObstetrics department, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Qingxue ZhangReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China. Zhqingx@mail.sysu.edu.cn.
Yihong GuoObstetrics and Gynecology department, Dongguan Maternal and Children Health Hospital, Dongguan, China.
Hui ChenReproductive Medicine Center, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No. 107 Yanjiang West Road, Guangzhou, 510120, People's Republic of China. chenhui9@mail.sysu.edu.cn.

Funding

Guangdong Natural Science Foundation 2023A1515010515National Natural Science Foundation of China 82201869Yixian Clinical Research 5010 Project of Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University SYS-5010-202410
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExtremely preterm birth (EPB), defined as delivery before 28 weeks of gestation, is a major contributor to neonatal morbidity and mortality. Accurate prediction of EPB is crucial for enabling timely interventions to improve neonatal outcomes and optimize resource allocation. Uterine electromyography (uEMG) is a non-invasive method that quantifies uterine electrical activity, offering potential for early EPB risk stratification. This study investigates the predictive value of uEMG parameters combined with traditional clinical risk factors for EPB.

methodsIn this retrospective study, 276 singleton pregnant women underwent uEMG monitoring between 20+0 and 27+6 weeks of gestation at Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital (Guangzhou, China) from January 2018 to May 2025 were collected. The association of uEMG parameters (contraction frequency, average peak contraction intensity, and average contraction duration) with EPB were analyzed using logistic regression.Two predictive models were developed: a traditional model, including: assisted reproductive technology (ART), prior deliveries between 12 and 28 weeks, and transvaginal cervical length (TVCL); an enhanced model incorporating uEMG parameters (contraction frequency, average contraction duration) and clinical risk factor. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), precision-recall curve, calibration curve and decision curve analysis were used to assess predictive performance.

resultIn total, 37 of 276 women (13.4%) experienced EPB, corresponding to 1 of 103 women in the no uterine contraction subgroup and 36 of 173 women in the uterine contraction subgroup. For model development, we restricted the analysis to the 173 women with detectable uterine contractions. Compared with the non-EPB group, the EPB group showed significantly higher contraction frequency, average peak contraction intensity, and average contraction duration. In multivariable analysis, higher contraction frequency and longer average contraction duration, ART, prior deliveries between 12 and 28 weeks, and shorter TVCL were independently associated with EPB. The uEMG model showed better discrimination than the traditional model (AUC-ROC 0.859, 95% CI 0.798–0.920 vs. 0.716, 95% CI 0.606–0.827; P < 0.05, DeLong test). In the derived nomogram, high-risk patients (score > 76) had markedly higher EPB rates than low-risk patients (training set: 42.9% vs. 10.0%; validation set: 55.6% vs. 0%; P < 0.001).

conclusionuEMG parameters, particularly contraction frequency and average contraction duration, are independent predictors of EPB. A prediction model integrating these parameters with ART history, prior deliveries between 12 and 28 weeks, and TVCL provides good discrimination and clinical utility for EPB risk stratification. As a non-invasive and dynamic monitoring tool, uEMG may complement traditional assessment; however, our findings are derived from a single-center retrospective cohort and should be validated in larger, multicenter prospective studies before routine clinical implementation.

Indexed as

ElectromyographyPremature BirthUterine ContractionUterusAdultFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant, Extremely PrematureInfant, NewbornLogistic ModelsPredictive Value of TestsPregnancyRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsElectromyographyExtremely preterm infantsPredictive learning models

Identifiers

PMID41454332
PMCPMC12849207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.