Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25874722›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015

Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy.

Zarko Alfirevic, Tamara Stampalija, Nancy Medley

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05778435 (The Effect Of The Wireless Fetal Monitoring Used During Birth On The Women's Comfort, Labour Pain And Birth Satisfaction), which is not on this map. Cited by 56 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
18.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT05778435 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

The Effect Of The Wireless Fetal Monitoring Used During Birth On The Women's Comfort, Labour Pain And Birth Satisfaction

TypeinterventionalSponsorTokat Gaziosmanpasa UniversityRan2021 to 2021Enrolled88ConditionsPregnancy RelatedArmswireless fetal monitoring system
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 200 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interobserver and intraobserver variability of fetal and maternal Doppler measurements: systematic review and meta-analysis.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Fetal death: Expert consensus of the French College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  12. Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  13. Routine ultrasound in late pregnancy (after 24 weeks' gestation).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Zarko AlfirevicDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, The University of Liverpool, First Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Crown Street, Liverpool, UK, L8 7SS.
Tamara Stampalija
Nancy Medley
Cochrane · GBIRCCS Materno Infantile Burlo Garofolo · ITLiverpool Womens NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the main aims of routine antenatal care is to identify the 'at risk' fetus in order to apply clinical interventions which could result in reduced perinatal morbidity and mortality. Doppler ultrasound study of umbilical artery waveforms helps to identify the compromised fetus in 'high-risk' pregnancies and, therefore, deserves assessment as a screening test in 'low-risk' pregnancies.

objectivesTo assess the effects on obstetric practice and pregnancy outcome of routine fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in unselected and low-risk pregnancies. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (28 February 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of Doppler ultrasound for the investigation of umbilical and fetal vessels waveforms in unselected pregnancies compared with no Doppler ultrasound. Studies where uterine vessels have been assessed together with fetal and umbilical vessels have been included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. In addition to standard meta-analysis, the two primary outcomes and five of the secondary outcomes were assessed using GRADE software and methodology. MAIN

resultsWe included five trials that recruited 14,624 women, with data analysed for 14,185 women. All trials had adequate allocation concealment, but none had adequate blinding of participants, staff or outcome assessors. Overall and apart from lack of blinding, the risk of bias for the included trials was considered to be low.Overall, routine fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound examination in low-risk or unselected populations did not result in increased antenatal, obstetric and neonatal interventions. There were no group differences noted for the review's primary outcomes of perinatal death and neonatal morbidity. Results for perinatal death were as follows: (average risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 1.83; four studies, 11,183 participants). Only one included trial assessed serious neonatal morbidity and found no evidence of group differences (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.75; one study, 2016 participants).For the comparison of a single Doppler assessment versus no Doppler, evidence for group differences in perinatal death was detected (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.99; one study, 3891 participants). However, these results are based on a single trial, and we would recommend caution when interpreting this finding.There was no evidence of group differences for the outcomes of caesarean section, neonatal intensive care admissions or preterm birth less than 37 weeks.When the quality of the evidence for the main comparison of 'All Doppler versus no Doppler' was assessed with GRADE software, the outcomes of perinatal death and serious neonatal morbidity data were graded as of low quality. Evidence for the outcome of stillbirth was graded according to regimen subgroups - with a moderate quality rating for stillbirth (fetal/umbilical vessels only) and a low quality rating for stillbirth (fetal/umbilical vessels + uterine artery vessels). Evidence for admission to neonatal intensive care unit was assessed as of moderate quality, and evidence for the outcomes of caesarean section and preterm birth less than 37 weeks was graded as of high quality.There is no available evidence to assess the effect on substantive long-term outcomes such as childhood neurodevelopment and no data to assess maternal outcomes, particularly maternal satisfaction. AUTHORS'

conclusionsExisting evidence does not provide conclusive evidence that the use of routine umbilical artery Doppler ultrasound, or combination of umbilical and uterine artery Doppler ultrasound in low-risk or unselected populations benefits either mother or baby. Future studies should be designed to address small changes in perinatal outcome, and should focus on potentially preventable deaths.

Indexed as

Ultrasonography, DopplerFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPerinatal MortalityPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUltrasonography, PrenatalUmbilical ArteriesUterine Artery

Identifiers

PMID25874722
PMCPMC6464774
OpenAlexW1550707014

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.