ArticleReviews in obstetrics & gynecology2012
Electronic Fetal Monitoring: A Defense Lawyer's View.
Article in Reviews in obstetrics & gynecology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Forensic Analysis of Umbilical and Newborn Blood Gas Values for Infants at Risk of Cerebral Palsy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) has been used for four decades, after its introduction without clinical trials. EFM spawned a birth injury litigation crisis centered on the myth that it predicts cerebral palsy (CP). The myth has resulted in lottery-like judgments against physicians. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and sister organizations worldwide have the power to halt EFM's clinical proliferation and the undeserved litigation verdicts against physicians unjustly blamed for causing CP. This power has been unused. If ACOG and other organizations would declare EFM unreliable, it could change the clinical standard of care and alleviate the CP-EFM malpractice lottery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23483132PMC3594858W2397378146What 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.