SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007
Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Fetal assessment methods for improving neonatal and maternal outcomes in preterm prelabour rupture of membranes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Screening and triage of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) in general population and high risk pregnancies: a systematic review with a focus on reduction of IUGR related stillbirths.BMC public health · 2011Pooled it
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Reducing stillbirths: screening and monitoring during pregnancy and labour.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2009Pooled it
- The effect of glucose administration on perceived fetal movements in women with decreased fetal movement, a double-blinded placebo-controlled trial.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2016Trial
- Women's experiences of two different self-assessment methods for monitoring fetal movements in full-term pregnancy--a crossover trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Cerebroplacental ratio and neonatal outcome in low-risk pregnancies with reduced fetal movement: A prospective study.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2022Article
- The Effects of Fetal Movement Counting on Pregnancy Outcomes.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Ultrasound observations of subtle movements: a pilot study comparing foetuses of smoking and nonsmoking mothers.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2015Article
- Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for the management of reduced fetal movements in UK maternity units.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2015Article
- Maternal perception of decreased fetal movements from maternal and fetal perspectives, a cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014Article
- Wavelet principal component analysis of fetal movement counting data preceding hospital examinations due to decreased fetal movement: a prospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2013Article
- A cross-sectional study of maternal perception of fetal movements and antenatal advice in a general pregnant population, using a qualitative framework.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2013Article
- Maternal Perception of Decreased Fetal Movement in One Twin: A Clue Leading to the Early Detection of Absent Variability due to Acute Twin-to-Twin Transfusion Syndrome.Case reports in obstetrics and gynecology · 2013Article
- Temporal patterns in count-to-ten fetal movement charts and their associations with pregnancy characteristics: a prospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2012Article
- Antepartum evaluation of the fetus and fetal well being.Clinical obstetrics and gynecology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFetal movement counting is a method by which a woman quantifies the movements she feels to assess the condition of the baby. The purpose is to try to reduce perinatal mortality by alerting caregivers when the baby might have become compromised. This method may be used routinely, or only in women who are considered at increased risk of complications in the baby. Some clinicians believe that fetal movement counting is a good method as it allows the clinician to make appropriate interventions in good time. On the other hand, fetal movement counting may cause anxiety to women.
objectivesTo assess outcomes of pregnancy where fetal movement counting was done routinely, selectively or was not done at all; and to compare different methods of fetal movement counting. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library) and the reference lists of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials. Trials were excluded where allocation concealment was inadequate and no measures were taken to prevent bias were excluded. The interventions included routine fetal movement counting, selective fetal movement counting, and studies comparing different fetal assessment methods. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed the methodological quality of included studies and extracted data from studies. MAIN
resultsFour studies, involving 71,370 women, were included in this review; 68,654 in one cluster-randomised trial. All four trials compared formal fetal movement counting. Two trials compared different types of counting with each other; one with no formal instruction, and one with hormonal analysis. Women in the formal fetal movement counting group had significantly fewer visits to the hospital antenatally than those women randomised to hormone analysis (relative risk (RR) 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.35), whereas there were fewer Apgar scores less than seven in five minutes for women randomised to hormone analysis (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.93). There was a significantly higher compliance with the Cardiff 'count to ten' method than with the formal fetal movement counting method (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.32).All other outcomes reported were non significant. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis review does not provide enough evidence to influence practice. In particular, no trials compared fetal movement counting with no fetal movement counting. Robust research is needed in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.