ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Rethinking Risk Prediction in Preeclampsia: From Biomarkers to Mechanistic Phenotypes and Longitudinal Models.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preeclampsia remains a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality worldwide, yet progress in biomarker discovery and predictive modeling has translated only modestly into clinically meaningful risk stratification. Over the past two decades, numerous biomarkers and predictors reflecting placental-angiogenic dysfunction, maternal cardiovascular maladaptation, and inflammatory-metabolic stress have been proposed, alongside increasingly sophisticated statistical and machine learning approaches. However, many predictive strategies continue to treat preeclampsia as a single disease entity and rely on static thresholds applied at isolated gestational time points. Accumulating biological and clinical evidence instead suggests that preeclampsia represents a heterogeneous syndrome composed of partially overlapping mechanistic phenotypes whose relative contributions vary across pregnancy and across individuals. In this narrative review, we argue that further progress in prediction is likely to depend less on the identification of additional biomarkers and more on how biological heterogeneity and temporal dynamics are integrated into predictive frameworks. We synthesize current evidence supporting multimarker approaches, phenotype-informed frameworks, and longitudinal risk trajectories that conceptualize prediction as a dynamic process rather than a binary classification task. We also examine the complementary roles of classical statistical models and machine learning, emphasizing that calibration, external validation, interpretability, transportability, and clinical usability are essential, alongside discrimination, for successful clinical implementation. Finally, we outline key research priorities for the next generation of predictive studies, including mechanistically grounded phenotyping, dynamic risk updating across gestation, rigorous evaluation across diverse populations, and explicit linkage of risk stratification to preventive interventions and clinical decision-making. Together, these directions support a shift toward an integrative, longitudinal, and clinically anchored approach to preeclampsia prediction.
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.