ArticleBMC medicine2026
Assessing the impact of maternal blood pressure during pregnancy on perinatal health: a wide-angled Mendelian randomization study.
Article in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using human genetics to understand the effect of modulating targets of antihypertensive drugs in pregnancy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Characterizing the effects of genetic liability to autoimmune conditions on pregnancy outcomes using Mendelian randomization.BMC medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundObservational studies link high blood pressure in pregnancy to numerous adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes; however, findings may be affected by residual confounding or reverse causation. This study aimed to assess the causal effect of blood pressure during pregnancy on a range of pregnancy and perinatal outcomes.
methodsWe performed two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) to assess the effect of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) during pregnancy on 16 primary and eight secondary adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. We obtained genetic association data from large-scale meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies involving predominantly European ancestry individuals for SBP/DBP (N = 1,028,980), and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes (N = 74,368-714,899). We used inverse-variance weighted (IVW) MR for main analyses and MR-Egger, weighted median, weighted mode, multivariable MR, and IVW adjusted for fetal genetic effects for sensitivity analyses.
resultsA 10 mmHg higher genetically predicted maternal SBP increased the odds of gestational diabetes, induction of labour, low birth weight (LBW), small-for-gestational age (SGA), preterm birth (PTB), and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (OR ranging from 1.11 [95% CI 1.02 to 1.20] for NICU admission to 1.33 [1.26 to 1.41] for LBW); while decreasing the odds of high birth weight (HBW), large-for-gestational age (LGA), and post-term birth [OR ranging from 0.76 (0.69 to 0.83) for HBW to 0.94 (0.90 to 0.99) for post-term birth]. We did not find evidence that genetically predicted higher maternal SBP was related to miscarriage or stillbirth. The results for maternal DBP were similar to the results for SBP. Overall, the main results were consistent across sensitivity analyses accounting for pleiotropic instruments and fetal genetic effects.
conclusionsHigher maternal blood pressure reduces gestation duration and fetal growth and increases the risks of induction of labour, gestational diabetes, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. This and other emerging evidence highlight the value of interventions aimed at controlling blood pressure in the population to reduce the burden of adverse pregnancy outcomes.
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.