ReviewActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2014
A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part I: the randomized controlled trials.
Review in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- ST waveform analysis vs cardiotocography alone for intrapartum fetal monitoring: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Pooled it
- Perinatal and Neonatal Outcomes Using Cardiotocography Versus STAN and Cardiotocography: a Systematic Review.Maedica · 2023Article
- Changing Perspectives of Electronic Fetal Monitoring.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2022Review
- Fetal autonomic malfunction as a marker of fetal distress in growth-restricted fetuses: three case reports.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2019Article
- New FIGO and Swedish intrapartum cardiotocography classification systems incorporated in the fetal ECG ST analysis (STAN) interpretation algorithm: agreements and discrepancies in cardiotocography classification and evaluation of significant ST events.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2018Article
- A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part II: the meta-analyses.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We reappraised the five randomized controlled trials that compared cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis (CTG+ST) vs. cardiotocography. The numbers enrolled ranged from 5681 (Dutch randomized controlled trial) to 799 (French randomized controlled trial). The Swedish randomized controlled trial (n = 5049) was the only trial adequately powered to show a difference in metabolic acidosis, and the Plymouth randomized controlled trial (n = 2434) was only powered to show a difference in operative delivery for fetal distress. There were considerable differences in study design: the French randomized controlled trial used different inclusion criteria, and the Finnish randomized controlled trial (n = 1483) used a different metabolic acidosis definition. In the CTG+ST study arms, the larger Plymouth, Swedish and Dutch trials showed lower operative delivery and metabolic acidosis rates, whereas the smaller Finnish and French trials showed minor differences in operative delivery and higher metabolic acidosis rates. We conclude that the differences in outcomes are likely due to the considerable differences in study design and size. This will enhance heterogeneity effects in any subsequent meta-analysis.
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.