ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2024
The predictive value of thromboelastography, routine blood indices, ultrasound parameters, and placental thickness in determining fetal outcome.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the predictive value of thromboelastography, routine blood indices, ultrasound measurements, and placental thickness for fetal outcome.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 218 expectant mothers at our hospital from April 2020 to June 2022 was conducted. Mothers were classified into favorable (n=164) and adverse (n=54) fetal outcome groups. We compared thromboelastography, blood counts, and ultrasound parameters, including placental thickness, between the two groups. Predictive models using lasso regression were developed for individual assessment type and their combinations. Model efficacies were evaluated by ROC curves and Delong's test.
resultsThromboelastography indicated significantly higher values of R (P=0.004), Angle (P<0.001), and MA (P=0.002) while notably lower K (P<0.001) in the adverse outcome group compared to the favorable outcome group. Peripheral blood analysis showed elevated levels of WBC (P<0.001), CRP (P=0.001), and PLR (P<0.001) in the adverse outcome group. Ultrasound assessments revealed significant increases in S/D (P<0.001), PI (P=0.016), RI (P<0.001), and placental thickness (P<0.001) in the adverse outcome group. The areas under the curve (AUCs) for the thromboelastography (4 features), peripheral blood indices (3 features), ultrasound parameters (4 features), and combined index model (11 features) were 0.774, 0.779, 0.961, and 0.978, respectively. Delong's test indicated that the combined model's AUC did not significantly differ from that of the ultrasound parameters (P>0.05) but was superior to the models based on thromboelastography, peripheral blood indices, and placental thickness alone (P<0.001).
conclusionThis study underscores the unparalleled predictive value of ultrasound metrics in identifying the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, highlighting their critical role in prenatal risk assessment and monitoring frameworks.
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.