ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Can preconception hematologic and biochemical parameters predict the subsequent pregnancy loss in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss?
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. 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
Abstract
objectiveThe study aimed to develop a prediction model to assess the risk of subsequent pregnancy loss in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), based on preconception hematologic and biochemical parameters.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study included RPL patients from 2020 to 2022 and collected their preconception routine blood and liver/kidney function test results. Patients were assigned to either training or validation set. The outcome was pregnancy loss before 24 weeks of gestation. Candidate predictors were selected using backward method and the Akaike Information Criterion. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed, and a nomogram was developed to estimate the risk of pregnancy loss. The model's discrimination was evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC), and calibration was assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to evaluate the clinical utility of the model.
resultsA total of 645 RPL patients were enrolled, with 351 in the training set and 294 in the validation set. Higher preconception levels of creatinine and indirect bilirubin were associated with a lower risk of pregnancy loss, while higher levels of uric acid, mean corpuscular volume, red blood cell distribution width-coefficient of variation, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, red blood cell count, and lymphocyte count were associated with increased risk. The final model included 11 variables: eight parameters, in addition to maternal age, number of previous live births, and number of previous pregnancy losses. The model demonstrated good discrimination in the training set (AUC = 0.721) and good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P = 0.183). External validation confirmed good performance, with an AUC of 0.740. The DCA indicated a positive net benefit of the model.
conclusionsThe nomogram developed in this study, incorporating preconception hematologic and biochemical parameters, demonstrated good predictive performance for pregnancy loss in RPL patients and may serve as a useful tool for individualized risk assessment.
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.