Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39841727›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2025

Diagnostic properties of differing BP thresholds for adverse pregnancy outcomes in standard-risk nulliparous women: A secondary analysis of SCOPE cohort data.

Laura Slade, Maya Blackman, Hiten D Mistry, Jeffrey N Bone, Milly Wilson, Nuhaat Syeda, Lucilla Poston, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A Magee, SCOPE Consortium

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 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. Article
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

10 authors.

Laura SladeRobinson Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8425-9359
Maya BlackmanDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6337-4232
Hiten D MistryDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2564-7348
Jeffrey N BoneDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7704-1677
Milly WilsonDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6127-8282
Nuhaat SyedaDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9783-5893
Lucilla PostonDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Peter von DadelszenDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4136-3070
Laura A MageeDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1355-610X
SCOPE Consortium

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2017, the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) lowered blood pressure (BP) thresholds to define hypertension in adults outside pregnancy. If used in pregnancy, these lower thresholds may identify women at increased risk of adverse outcomes, which would be particularly useful to risk-stratify nulliparous women. In this secondary analysis of the SCOPE cohort, we asked whether, among standard-risk nulliparous women, the ACC/AHA BP categories could identify women at increased risk for adverse outcomes. METHODS AND

findingsIncluded were pregnancies in the international SCOPE cohort with birth at ≥20 weeks' gestation, 2004 to 2008. Women were mostly of white ethnicity, in their 20s, and of normal-to-overweight body mass index (BMI). Excluded were pregnancies ending in fetal loss at <20 weeks' gestation, and those terminated at any point in pregnancy. Women were categorized by highest BP during pregnancy, using ACC/AHA criteria: normal (BP <120/80 mmHg), "Elevated BP" (BP 120 to 129 mmHg/<80 mmHg), "Stage-1 hypertension" (systolic BP [sBP] 130 to 139 mmHg or diastolic BP [dBP] 80 to 89 mmHg), and "Stage-2 hypertension" that was non-severe (sBP 140 to 159 mmHg or dBP 90 to 109 mmHg) or severe (sBP ≥160 mmHg or dBP ≥110 mmHg). Primary outcomes were preterm birth (PTB), low birthweight, postpartum hemorrhage, and neonatal care admission. Adjusted relative risks (aRRs) and diagnostic test properties were calculated for each outcome, according to: each BP category (versus "normal"), and using the lower limit of each BP category as a cut-off. RRs were adjusted for maternal age, BMI, smoking, ethnicity, and alcohol use. Of 5,628 women in SCOPE, 5,597 were included in this analysis. When compared with normotension, severe "Stage 2 hypertension" was associated with PTB (24.0% versus 5.3%; aRR 4.88, 95% confidence interval, CI [3.46 to 6.88]), birthweight <10th centile (24.4% versus 8.8%; aRR 2.70 [2.00 to 3.65]), and neonatal unit admission (32.9% versus 8.9%; aRR 3.40 [2.59 to 4.46]). When compared with normotension, non-severe "Stage 2 hypertension" was associated with birthweight <10th centile (16.1% versus 8.8%; aRR 1.82 [1.45 to 2.29]) and neonatal unit admission (15.4% versus 8.9%; aRR 1.65 [1.31 to 2.07]), but no association with adverse outcomes was seen with BP categories below "Stage 2 hypertension." When each BP category was assessed as a threshold for diagnosis of abnormal BP (compared with BP values below), only severe "Stage 2 hypertension" had a useful (good) likelihood ratio (LR) of 5.09 (95% CI [3.84 to 6.75]) for PTB. No BP threshold could rule-out adverse outcomes (i.e., had a negative LR <0.2). Limitations of our analysis include lack of ethnic diversity and use of values from clinical notes for BP within 2 weeks before birth. This study was limited by: its retrospective nature, not all women having BP recorded at all visits, and the lack of detail about some outcomes.

conclusionsIn this study, we observed that 2017 ACC/AHA BP categories demonstrated a similar pattern of association and diagnostic test properties in nulliparous women, as seen in the general obstetric population. BP thresholds below the currently used "Stage 2 hypertension" were not associated with PTB, low birthweight, postpartum hemorrhage, or neonatal unit admission. This study does not support implementation of lower BP values as abnormal in nulliparous pregnant women.

Indexed as

Blood PressureHypertensionParityPregnancy OutcomeAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyPremature BirthRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39841727
PMCPMC11798451

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.