Red cell distribution width and preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preeclampsia is a serious pregnancy-related disease which may lead to adverse health effects to the mother and fetus. Besides many publications on the association of red cell distribution width (RDW) and preeclampsia, there has been no published meta-analysis. This necessitated the present systemic review and met-analysis to assess the RDW in relation to preeclampsia.Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline was followed. Relevant published studies were searched in PubMed, Cochrane library, Google scholar, Scopus, Embase and CINAHL using the term "Preeclampsia OR eclampsia AND red cell distribution width OR red blood cells). Modified Newcastle - Ottawa quality assessment scale was used for critical appraisal of retrieved studies. Pooled Meta logistic regression was computed using OpenMeta Analyst software. Subgroup and meta-regression methods were performed to analyse the heterogeneity.Eleven case control studies were included in the met-analyses with a total of 951 cases (preeclampsia) and 2024 controls. The mean (SD) of the RDW level was significantly higher in women with preeclampsia compared to controls [15.10 (2.48) % vs. 14.26(1.71) %, P < 0.001]. The mean difference was 0.85, 95% CI = 0.26-1.43. Due to a high heterogeneity (I2 = 90.45, P < 0.001), the continuous random effect model was used.Eight studies compared RDW level in the mild (N = 360) with severe cases (N = 354) of preeclampsia. The RDW level was significantly higher in women with severe preeclampsia compared to those with mild preeclampsia [15.37 (2.48) % vs. 14.037(1.79) %, P < 0.001]. The mean difference was 1.07, 95% CI = 0.45-1.70. Since there is a high heterogeneity [I2 = 76.67, P < 0.001], the continuous random effect model was used.Through the met-regression model, except for the region of the study (P < 0.001), none of investigated variables (age, parity, quality of the study) was significantly associated with the investigated heterogeneity. The outliers (3studies) were removed to reduce the heterogeneity. The pooled meta-analysis of the remaining 8 studies showed a significant difference in the RDW between preeclamptic women compared with the controls. The mean difference was 0.93, 95% CI = 0.56-1.31, P < 0.001. Because of heterogeneity [I2 = 69.6, P = 0.002], the continuous random effect model was used.RDW level was significantly higher in women with preeclampsia compared to controls. Similarly, women with severe preeclampsia had significantly higher RDW than those with the mild form.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".