ArticleWorld journal of radiology2026
Predictive performance of cervical elastography for preterm birth: A head-to-head network meta-analysis.
Article in World journal of radiology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly detection of cervical remodeling is vital for predicting preterm birth (PTB). Conventional morphologic indices, such as cervical length (CL) and anterior cervical angle (ACA), demonstrate limited diagnostic accuracy. Elastic imaging of the cervix (E-cervix) elastography offers functional biomechanical insights by quantifying cervical strain and stiffness. However, a systematic comparison of its diverse parameters alongside traditional indices is currently lacking. Identifying the most effective ultrasound-based markers is essential for improving mid-trimester risk stratification and facilitating timely clinical interventions to improve perinatal outcomes.
aimTo evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of E-cervix parameters, CL, and ACA for PTB.
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data were searched up to December 1, 2025. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of E-cervix parameters, CL, or ACA for PTB were included. A Bayesian network meta-analysis estimated pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR). The comparative performance was ranked using the advantage index. Heterogeneity was assessed
resultsFifteen studies involving 1965 pregnancies (570 PTB cases) were included. The multi-parametric combined model demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance, with an area under the curve of 0.91, sensitivity of 0.83, specificity of 0.83, and a DOR of 26.23. Among individual parameters, ACA (DOR: 13.65) and the E-cervix hardness ratio (DOR: 7.71) significantly outperformed conventional CL (DOR: 3.58). Subgroup analysis revealed that the combined model was particularly effective in singleton pregnancies (sensitivity: 0.837, specificity: 0.882). No significant publication bias was detected except for elasticity contrast index.
conclusionE-cervix elastography provides superior diagnostic value compared to conventional CL measurement. The integration of biomechanical and morphological data
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.