SynthesisReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2026
Assisted Reproductive Technology as Predictor for Preeclampsia: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Prediction Models.
Synthesis in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) increases the risk of preeclampsia (PE), yet no specific prediction model tailored to the ART population exists. This review evaluates prediction models incorporating ART as a predictor, focusing on risk of bias, performance, generalizability and clinical applicability. A systematic MEDLINE search up to July 2023 identified models predicting PE that included ART as a predictor. Exclusion comprised studies on outcomes after PE onset, univariable models and validation studies of previously validated models. Risk of bias, applicability and generalizability were assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) and the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis and Diagnosis (TRIPOD) guideline. Out of 15,305 records, 161 articles were assessed in full-text, yielding fifteen eligible studies. Eleven studies were added from a prior systematic review. Performance varied widely (AUC 0.58-0.99) and only few (7/26) models had been externally validated. Risk of bias was unclear in most studies (21/26), due to analytical issues. Despite ART being an established risk factor for PE, robust and generalizable models with proven external validity are lacking. Future research should prioritize development of a high quality prediction model including ART, or a model developed specifically within ART populations.
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.