SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003
Biochemical tests of placental function for assessment in pregnancy.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Planned hospital birth versus planned home birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiochemical tests of placental or feto-placental function were widely used in the 1960s and 1970s in high-risk pregnancies to try to predict, and thus try to avoid, adverse fetal outcome.
objectivesTo assess the effects of performing biochemical tests of placental function in high-risk, low-risk, or unselected pregnancies. SEARCH STRATEGY: Comprehensive electronic search of the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (February 2003). SELECTION CRITERIA: Controlled trials (randomized or 'quasi-randomized') that compare the use of biochemical tests of placental function in pregnancy with non-use. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed and data were extracted by the reviewer. MAIN
resultsA single eligible trial of poor quality was identified. It involved 622 women with high-risk pregnancies who had had plasma (o)estriol estimations. Women were allocated to have their (o)estriol results revealed or concealed on the basis of hospital record number (with attendant risk of selection bias). There were no obvious differences in perinatal mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 2.13) or planned delivery (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.15) between the two groups. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsThe available trial data do not support the use of (o)estriol estimation in high-risk pregnancies. The single small trial available does not have the power to exclude a beneficial effect but this is probably of historical interest since biochemical testing has been superseded by biophysical testing in antepartum fetal assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12804386What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.