Cited by 425Pregnancy and preeclampsia studiesNeurological Complications and SyndromesPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics

Uterine artery Doppler at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks in the prediction of pre‐eclampsia

Open access
Plasencia, W., Maiz, N., Bonino, S., Kaihura, C., Nicolaides, K. H.·2007·Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

Objective: To determine the performance of screening for pre‐eclampsia (PET) by maternal characteristics and uterine artery pulsatility index (PI) at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation. Methods: In women with singleton pregnancies attending for routine care at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation we recorded maternal variables and measured the uterine artery PI. We identified 107 cases that subsequently developed PET and 5041 that were unaffected by PET, gestational hypertension or delivery of newborns with birth weight below the 10 th centile. A multivariate Gaussian model was fitted to the distribution of log multiples of the median (MoM) PI in the PET and unaffected groups. Likelihood ratios for log MoM PI were computed and used together with maternal variables to produce patient‐specific risks for each case. Predicted detection rates (DR) and false‐positive rates (FPR) were calculated by taking the proportions with risks above a given risk threshold. Results: In the unaffected group log MoM PI was influenced by maternal ethnic origin, body mass index, previous history of PET and fetal crown–rump length. In the prediction of PET significant contributions were provided by log MoM PI, ethnic origin, body mass index and previous and family history of PET. For an FPR of 10% the DRs of all PET and PET leading to delivery before 34 weeks' gestation by log MoM PI and maternal variables were 61.7% and 81.8%, respectively. Conclusion: Maternal variables together with uterine artery PI at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation provide sensitive prediction of the development of PET, especially of severe early‐onset PET. Copyright © 2007 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.5157

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Uterine artery Doppler velocimetry is associated with the development of preeclampsia and placental pathology.

    “Ultrasound can be used to measure Doppler velocimetry in the uterine artery, which is associated with development of preeclampsia and placental pathology21,22”

    From Multi-centre deep learning for placenta segmentation in obstetric ultrasound with multi-observer and cross-country generalization (2023) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Methods describe ultrasound Doppler measurement of uterine artery pulsatility index, and the paper reports that this measure predicts pre-eclampsia. The Discussion interprets higher values as evidence of impaired placentation, but the paper does not report a direct association between Doppler measurements and measured placental pathology. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Why mothers die 2000-2002: the sixth report of confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom, Lewis G (ed.). RCOG Press: London, 2004.
  2. Poston L, Briley AL, Seed PT, Kelly FJ, Shennan AH. Vitamins in Pre-eclampsia (VIP) Trial Consortium. Lancet 2006; 367: 1145-1154.
  3. von Dadelszen P, Magee LA, Roberts JM. Subclassification of pre-eclampsia. Hypertens Pregnancy 2003; 22: 143-148.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Plasencia, W., Maiz, N., Bonino, S., Kaihura, C., & Nicolaides, K. H.
Affiliations
Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Nicolaides, K. H.
Venue
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-09-26
Volume
30
Issue
5
Pages
742-749
ISSN
  • 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-0705
OpenAlex
W2130645342
Cited by
425
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 23
FWCI
28.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fetal Medicine Foundation (1 037 116)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Neurological Complications and Syndromes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Keywords
preeclampsia, uterine artery pulsatility index, Doppler ultrasound, preeclampsia screening, early pregnancy, maternal risk factors, body mass index, likelihood ratios, detection rate, false positive rate
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Arteries, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Pre-Eclampsia, Predictive Value of Tests, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Prospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Uterus, Ultrasonography, Doppler, Color, Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced

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