Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23691343›Full record

ArticleISRN obstetrics and gynecology2013

Assessment of bony pelvis and vaginally assisted deliveries.

Ulla Korhonen, Pekka Taipale, Seppo Heinonen

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ISRN obstetrics and gynecology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Determining the Incidence of Gynecoid Pelvis Using Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography in Nonpregnant Multiparous Women.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ulla KorhonenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kuopio University Hospital, P.O. Box 100, 70029 KYS, Finland ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, North-Carelian Central Hospital, Tikkamäentie 16, 80210 Joensuu, Finland.
Pekka Taipale
Seppo Heinonen
Kuopio University Hospital · FINorth Karelia Central Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate whether pelvic measurements have any association with operative vaginal deliveries and the duration of the second stage of the delivery. Study design. A retrospective study of pregnant women at an increased risk of fetal-pelvic disproportion during 2000-2008 in North-Carelian Central Hospital. The mode of the vaginal delivery was chosen to represent the reference standard. The target condition was spontaneous vaginal delivery. Patients were divided into subgroups according to the size of the fetus and also by the parity to evaluate the variability reflecting differences in patient groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were established. Results. A total of 226 participants with fetal cephalic presentation delivered vaginally; of these, 184 women delivered spontaneously, and 42 women required operative vaginal delivery with vacuum extraction. There were no clinically or statistically significant differences between the size of the maternal pelvic outlet and the different modes of delivery types within these subgroups. With respect to the pelvic inlet and outlet, the areas under the curve in ROC were 0.566 with the P value of 0.18 and 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.465-0.667 and 0.573 (95% CI: 0.484-0.622; P = 0.14). Conclusions. The maternal bony pelvic dimensions exhibited virtually no correlation with the need for operative vaginal deliveries.

Identifiers

PMID23691343
PMCPMC3649162
OpenAlexW2092014998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.