English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Preeclampsia (PE) increases maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Based on a multitude of data from randomized clinical trials, clinical practice guidelines endorse using ASA to prevent PE in women who are “at risk.” However, data are lacking about the level of absolute risk to warrant starting ASA prophylaxis.    Methods and Findings  We present two approaches for objectively determining the minimum absolute risk for PE at which ASA prophylaxis is justified. The first is a new approach—the minimum control event rate (CER min ). The second approach uses a pre-existing concept—the minimum event rate for treatment (MERT). Here we show how the CER min  is derived, and then use the CER min  and the MERT to guide us to a reasonable risk threshold for starting a woman on ASA prophylaxis against PE based on clinical risk assessment. We suggest that eligible women need not be at “high risk” for preeclampsia to warrant ASA, but rather at some modestly elevated absolute risk of 6–10%.    Conclusions  Given its very low cost, its widespread availability, ease of administration and its safety profile, ASA is a highly attractive agent for the prevention of maternal and perinatal morbidity worldwide.

Risk Threshold for Starting Low Dose Aspirin in Pregnancy to Prevent Preeclampsia: An Opportunity at a Low Cost