Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 711

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Procedure‐related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Akolekar, R., Beta, J., Picciarelli, G., Ogilvie, C., D'Antonio, F.·2015·Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

Objectives: To estimate procedure‐related risks of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling ( CVS ) based on a systematic review of the literature and a meta‐analysis. Methods: A search of MEDLINE , EMBASE , CINHAL and The Cochrane Library (2000–2014) was performed to review relevant citations reporting procedure‐related complications of amniocentesis and CVS . Only studies reporting data on more than 1000 procedures were included in this review to minimize the effect of bias from smaller studies. Heterogeneity between studies was estimated using Cochran's Q, the I 2 statistic and Egger bias. Meta‐analysis of proportions was used to derive weighted pooled estimates for the risk of miscarriage before 24 weeks' gestation. Incidence–rate difference meta‐analysis was used to estimate pooled procedure‐related risks. Results: The weighted pooled risks of miscarriage following invasive procedures were estimated from analysis of controlled studies including 324 losses in 42 716 women who underwent amniocentesis and 207 losses in 8899 women who underwent CVS. The risk of miscarriage prior to 24 weeks in women who underwent amniocentesis and CVS was 0.81% (95% CI, 0.58–1.08%) and 2.18% (95% CI, 1.61–2.82%), respectively. The background rates of miscarriage in women from the control group that did not undergo any procedures were 0.67% (95% CI, 0.46–0.91%) for amniocentesis and 1.79% (95% CI, 0.61–3.58%) for CVS. The weighted pooled procedure‐related risks of miscarriage for amniocentesis and CVS were 0.11% (95% CI, –0.04 to 0.26%) and 0.22% (95% CI, –0.71 to 1.16%), respectively. Conclusion: The procedure‐related risks of miscarriage following amniocentesis and CVS are much lower than are currently quoted. Copyright © 2014 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/uog.14636

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 711

Metadata

Authors
Akolekar, R., Beta, J., Picciarelli, G., Ogilvie, C., & D'Antonio, F.
Venue
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-01
Volume
45
Issue
1
Pages
16-26
ISSN
  • 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-0705
OpenAlex
W2045241738
Cited by
711
References
8
FWCI
12.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Procedure‐related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/uog.14636
The paper
Akolekar, R., Beta, J., Picciarelli, G., Ogilvie, C., & D'Antonio, F. (2015). Procedure‐related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.14636

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.