Study record
Serum MOTS-c levels remain unchanged in patients with preeclampsia
Tok A, Serdar O, Kandilcik OF et al. · Ginekol Pol · 2023
Human obs.Endogenous MOTS-c measuredEvidence tier B
What this study reported
Measured serum MOTS-c in women with mild or severe preeclampsia and in women with uncomplicated pregnancy and reported no statistically significant difference between the groups, including between early- and late-onset preeclampsia.
Limitations
Small single-centre groups with one sample per participant; maternal smoking differed between groups and may confound the comparison; the study is underpowered to exclude a small difference.
Study record
| Study model | Human observational |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | Endogenous MOTS-c measuredNaturally occurring MOTS-c was measured; nothing was given. |
| Species | human |
| System studied | Serum MOTS-c in pregnancies with mild or severe preeclampsia and uncomplicated pregnancies |
| Population | pregnant women with mild or severe preeclampsia and women with uncomplicated pregnancy |
| Design | Cross-sectional case-control study |
| Sample size as reported | 90 participants (30 uncomplicated, 30 mild preeclampsia, 30 severe preeclampsia) |
| Control group | women with uncomplicated pregnancy |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | serum MOTS-c; systolic and diastolic blood pressure; platelet count |
| Pathways measured | Not reported |
| Research areas | Pregnancy |
| Evidence tier | B — Other human study |
| Publication types | Journal Article |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Human
- Sample size
- Small
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Exploratory
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.