ArticleIranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
Relationship between False Positive Screening Results of Down Syndrome and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes.
Article in Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Maternal serum sample screening in the first and second trimesters has been commonly used to identify women who are at risk of fetal trisomy 21. In addition, these serum markers are associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Hence, the present study was conducted to determine the relationship between false positive screening results of Down syndrome and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Material and Methods: This prospective, two-group, cohort study was conducted on 608 pregnant women who had undergone fetal contingent screening. They were selected through convenience sampling in the twentieth week of pregnancy and were followed up until delivery. The raw Odd Ratios (OR), Relative Risk (RR), and adjusted OR of adverse pregnancy outcomes were calculated in the false positive and true negative groups. Results: The adjusted OR of developing preeclampsia was 1.98 (95%CI: 1.14-3.42), and its RR was 2.13 (95%CI: 1.34-3.38) times higher in the false positive group. Moreover, the adjusted OR of Small for Gestational Age (SGA) was 2.80 (95%CI: 1.76-4.47), and its RR was 2.28 (95%CI: 1.54-3.36) times higher in the false positive group. The adjusted OR of Low Birth Weight (LBW) was 3.34 (95%CI: 1.97-5.64), and its RR was 2.65 (95%CI: 1.72-4.11) times higher in the false positive group. In addition, no significant difference was observed between false positive and true negative groups in terms of preterm birth. Conclusions: Women with a false positive fetal screening test result are more likely to suffer from preeclampsia, SGA, and LBW and require planned prenatal care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.