The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pregnancy of unknown location: a consensus statement of nomenclature, definitions, and outcome
Open accessAbstract
Objective To improve the interpretation of future studies in women who are initially diagnosed with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL), we propose a consensus statement with definitions of population, target disease and final outcome. Methods A review of literature and a series of collaborative international meetings were used to develop a consensus for definitions and final outcomes of women initially diagnosed with a PUL. Results Global differences were noted in populations studied and in the definitions of outcomes. We propose to define initial ultrasound classification of findings into five categories: definite ectopic pregnancy (EP), probable EP, PUL, probable intrauterine pregnancy (IUP), and definite IUP. Patients with a PUL should be followed and final outcomes should be categorized as visualized EP, visualized IUP, spontaneously resolved PUL and persisting PUL. Those with the transient condition of a persisting PUL should ultimately be classified as non-visualized EP, treated persistent PUL, resolved persistent PUL, or histological IUP. These specific categories can be used to characterize the natural history or location (intra- vs. extrauterine) of any early gestation where the initial location is unknown. Conclusions Careful definition of populations and classification of outcomes should optimize objective interpretation of research, allow objective assessment of future reproductive prognosis and hopefully lead to improved clinical care of women initially identified to have a PUL.
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
Cited by
Diagnostic Criteria for Nonviable Pregnancy Early in the First Trimester
Doubilet, P. M., Benson, C. B., Bourne, T., & Blaivas, M. (2013) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra1302417 · Cited by 414
Self-citationKolte, A. M., Bernardi, L. A., Christiansen, O. B., Quenby, S., Farquharson, R. G., Goddijn, M., Stephenson, M. D., & on behalf of the ESHRE Special Interest Group, E. P. (2015) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/deu299 · Cited by 386
(2018) · Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine · doi:10.1002/jum.14831 · Cited by 216
Non-visualized pregnancy losses are prognostically important for unexplained recurrent miscarriage
Kolte, A. M., van Oppenraaij, R. H., Quenby, S., Farquharson, R. G., Stephenson, M., Goddijn, M., & Christiansen, O. B. (2014) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/deu042 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- Barnhart, K., van Mello, N. M., Bourne, T., Kirk, E., Van Calster, B., Bottomley, C., Chung, K., Condous, G., Goldstein, S., Hajenius, P. J., Mol, B. W., Molinaro, T., O’Flynn O’Brien, K. L., Husicka, R., Sammel, M., & Timmerman, D.
- Venue
- Fertility and Sterility
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 857-866
- ISSN
- 0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2150428874
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.21
- 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: Pregnancy of unknown location: a consensus statement of nomenclature, definitions, and outcome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.09.006
- The paper
- Barnhart, K., van Mello, N. M., Bourne, T., Kirk, E., Van Calster, B., Bottomley, C., Chung, K., Condous, G., Goldstein, S., Hajenius, P. J., Mol, B. W., Molinaro, T., O’Flynn O’Brien, K. L., Husicka, R., Sammel, M., & Timmerman, D. (2011). Pregnancy of unknown location: a consensus statement of nomenclature, definitions, and outcome. Fertility and Sterility. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.09.006
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.