The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
First‐trimester uterine artery Doppler and adverse pregnancy outcome: a meta‐analysis involving 55 974 women
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: To determine the accuracy with which uterine artery Doppler in the first trimester of pregnancy predicts pre‐eclampsia and fetal growth restriction, particularly early‐onset disease. Methods: We searched MEDLINE (1951–2012), EMBASE (1980–2012) and the Cochrane Library (2012) for relevant citations without language restrictions. Two reviewers independently selected studies that evaluated the accuracy of first‐trimester uterine artery Doppler to predict adverse pregnancy outcome and performed data extraction to construct 2 × 2 tables. We synthesized sensitivity and specificity for various Doppler indices using a bivariate random‐effects model. Results: From 1866 citations, we identified 18 studies (55 974 women). The sensitivity and specificity of abnormal uterine artery flow velocity waveform (FVW) in the prediction of early‐onset pre‐eclampsia were 47.8% (95% CI: 39.0–56.8) and 92.1% (95% CI: 88.6–94.6), and in the prediction of early‐onset fetal growth restriction were 39.2% (95% CI: 26.3–53.8) and 93.1% (95% CI: 90.6–95.0), respectively. The sensitivities for predicting any pre‐eclampsia and fetal growth restriction were 26.4% (95% CI: 22.5–30.8) and 15.4% (95% CI: 12.4–18.9), respectively, and the specificities were 93.4% (95% CI: 90.4–95.5%) and 93.3% (95% CI: 90.9–95.1), respectively. The number needed to treat (NNT) with aspirin to prevent one case of early‐onset pre‐eclampsia fell from 1000 to 173 and from 2500 to 421 for background risks varying between 1% and 0.4%, respectively. Conclusions: First‐trimester uterine artery Doppler is a useful tool for predicting early‐onset pre‐eclampsia, as well as other adverse pregnancy outcomes. Based on the NNT, abnormal uterine artery Doppler in low‐risk women achieves a sufficiently high performance to justify aspirin prophylaxis in those who test positive. Copyright © 2013 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Whiting, P., Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Bossuyt, P. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2003) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-25 · Cited by 3,592
Reitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W. S., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 · Cited by 3,369
Steegers, E. A., von Dadelszen, P., Duvekot, J. J., & Pijnenborg, R. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60279-6 · Cited by 2,850
Risk factors for pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic review of controlled studies
Duckitt, K., & Harrington, D. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38380.674340.e0 · Cited by 1,784
Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests
Deeks, J. J. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7305.157 · Cited by 1,340
Bujold, E., Roberge, S., Lacasse, Y., Bureau, M., Audibert, F., Marcoux, S., Forest, J.-C., & Giguère, Y. (2010) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e3181e9322a · Cited by 1,092
Antiplatelet agents for prevention of pre-eclampsia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data
Askie, L. M., Duley, L., Henderson-Smart, D. J., & Stewart, L. A. (2007) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60712-0 · Cited by 1,020
Intensive Care for Extreme Prematurity — Moving beyond Gestational Age
Tyson, J. E., Parikh, N. A., Langer, J., Green, C., & Higgins, R. D. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa073059 · Cited by 986
Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests
(2001) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 850
Cnossen, J. S., Morris, R. K., ter Riet, G., Mol, B. W. J., van der Post, J. A. M., Coomarasamy, A., Zwinderman, A. H., Robson, S. C., Bindels, P. J. E., Kleijnen, J., et al. (2008) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.070430 · Cited by 719
Self-citation
Cited by
Pre-eclampsia: pathophysiology and clinical implications
Burton, G. J., Redman, C. W., Roberts, J. M., & Moffett, A. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l2381 · Cited by 1,250
Poon, L. C., Shennan, A., Hyett, J. A., Kapur, A., Hadar, E., Divakar, H., McAuliffe, F., da Silva Costa, F., von Dadelszen, P., McIntyre, H. D., et al. (2019) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.12802 · Cited by 1,238
Pathophysiology of placental-derived fetal growth restriction
Burton, G. J., & Jauniaux, E. (2018) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.11.577 · Cited by 1,070
Metadata
- Authors
- Velauthar, L., Plana, M. N., Kalidindi, M., Zamora, J., Thilaganathan, B., Illanes, S. E., Khan, K. S., Aquilina, J., & Thangaratinam, S.
- Venue
- Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-04-04
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 500-507
- ISSN
- 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-0705
- OpenAlex
- W2135126730
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 18.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: First‐trimester uterine artery Doppler and adverse pregnancy outcome: a meta‐analysis involving 55 974 women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/uog.13275
- The paper
- Velauthar, L., Plana, M. N., Kalidindi, M., Zamora, J., Thilaganathan, B., Illanes, S. E., Khan, K. S., Aquilina, J., & Thangaratinam, S. (2014). First‐trimester uterine artery Doppler and adverse pregnancy outcome: a meta‐analysis involving 55 974 women. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.13275
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.