Discussion: ‘Predicting spontaneous preterm birth’ by Esplin et al




In the roundtable that follows, clinicians discuss a study published in this issue of the Journal in light of its methodology, relevance to practice, and implications for future research. Article discussed:


Esplin MS, Merrell K, Goldenberg R, et al; the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units. Proteomic identification of serum peptides predicting subsequent spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;204:391.e1-8.


Discussion questions




  • ■

    Was the overall study design a good choice?


  • ■

    What was the Preterm Prediction Study?


  • ■

    Was it reasonable to use data from the early 1990s?


  • ■

    What were the main findings?


  • ■

    What does ITIH4 do?


  • ■

    What were the study’s strengths and weaknesses?


Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Related posts:

  1. Proteomic identification of serum peptides predicting subsequent spontaneous preterm birth
  2. Arteriovenous malformation identification after conservative management of placenta percreta with uterine artery embolization and adjunctive therapy
  3. Stage-based outcomes of 682 consecutive cases of twin–twin transfusion syndrome treated with laser surgery: the USFetus experience
  4. Arteriovenous malformation identification after conservative management of placenta percreta with uterine artery embolization and adjunctive therapy

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Tags:
May 31, 2017 | Posted by in GYNECOLOGY | Comments Off on Discussion: ‘Predicting spontaneous preterm birth’ by Esplin et al

Full access? Get Clinical Tree
Get Clinical Tree app for offline access