ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Cervical cerclage outcomes by indication and cervical length across gestational-age thresholds: a historical cohort study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cerclage reduces the risk of preterm birth, but factors associated with its success may not be uniform. Among singleton pregnancies with ultrasound- or physical examination-indicated cerclage (no history-based indication), we examined whether factors associated with delivery differ by gestational-age threshold.
methodsThis single-center historical cohort included 114 women undergoing cerclage between May 2020 and December 2025: ultrasound-indicated with cervical length 10 to < 20 mm (Group 1, n = 41) or < 10 mm (Group 2, n = 32), and physical examination-indicated cervical dilatation (Group 3, n = 41). All cerclages used the McDonald technique with polypropylene monofilament suture. The primary outcome was gestational age at delivery, assessed at ≥ 34, < 32, and < 28 weeks. Firth penalized multivariable logistic regression evaluated study group, maternal age, and gestational age at cerclage as primary covariates; post-cerclage cervical length was analyzed separately as a secondary post-treatment-adjusted variable. All models were exploratory, and p values were nominal.
resultsIn these exploratory models, factors associated with delivery differed across thresholds. For delivery ≥ 34 weeks, gestational age at cerclage was the only covariate independently associated with the outcome (aOR 1.28 per week, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59; p = 0.021). For delivery before 32 weeks (aOR 2.96, 95% CI 1.08 to 8.66; p = 0.034) and before 28 weeks (aOR 9.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 91.11; p = 0.003), physical examination-indicated cerclage was the only covariate that reached significance; 11 of the 14 deliveries before 28 weeks occurred in this group, so this estimate is imprecise and near-separating. The numerically higher rate of delivery ≥ 34 weeks in Group 2 than Group 1 (78.1% vs. 70.7%) was not statistically significant. Apparent discrimination was moderate (AUC 0.69 to 0.77), without internal validation.
conclusionsIn this exploratory single-center cohort, the factors associated with delivery varied with the gestational-age threshold examined. Near term, later gestational age at cerclage was associated with delivery ≥ 34 weeks; at earlier thresholds, physical examination-indicated cerclage identified a higher-risk group for very and extreme preterm delivery, although these estimates were imprecise and partly confounded by indication severity and co-interventions. Findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in larger prospective studies.
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.