Early Pregnancy Prediction of Preeclampsia in Nulliparous Women, Combining Clinical Risk and Biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than half of all cases of preeclampsia occur in healthy first-time pregnant women. Our aim was to develop a method to predict those at risk by combining clinical factors and measurements of biomarkers in women recruited to the Screening for Pregnancy Endpoints (SCOPE) study of low-risk nulliparous women. Forty-seven biomarkers identified on the basis of (1) association with preeclampsia, (2) a biological role in placentation, or (3) a role in cellular mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia were measured in plasma sampled at 14 to 16 weeks' gestation from 5623 women. The cohort was randomly divided into training (n=3747) and validation (n=1876) cohorts. Preeclampsia developed in 278 (4.9%) women, of whom 28 (0.5%) developed early-onset preeclampsia. The final model for the prediction of preeclampsia included placental growth factor, mean arterial pressure, and body mass index at 14 to 16 weeks' gestation, the consumption of ≥3 pieces of fruit per day, and mean uterine artery resistance index. The area under the receiver operator curve (95% confidence interval) for this model in training and validation cohorts was 0.73 (0.70-0.77) and 0.68 (0.63-0.74), respectively. A predictive model of early-onset preeclampsia included angiogenin/placental growth factor as a ratio, mean arterial pressure, any pregnancy loss <10 weeks, and mean uterine artery resistance index (area under the receiver operator curve [95% confidence interval] in training and validation cohorts, 0.89 [0.78-1.0] and 0.78 [0.58-0.99], respectively). Neither model included pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, previously reported to predict preeclampsia in populations of mixed parity and risk. In nulliparous women, combining multiple biomarkers and clinical data provided modest prediction of preeclampsia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".