ArticleBMC research notes2015
A cross sectional study evaluating screening using maternal anthropometric measurements for outcomes of childbirth in Ugandan mothers at term.
Article in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Effect of maternal height on caesarean section and neonatal mortality rates in sub-Saharan Africa: An analysis of 34 national datasets.PloS one · 2018Article
- [External anthropometric measurement and pelvimetry among nulliparous women in Lubumbashi: risk factors and predictive score of mechanical dystocia].The Pan African medical journal · 2018Article
- Association between Maternal Pelvis Height and Intrapartum Foetal Head Moulding in Ugandan Mothers with Spontaneous Vertex Deliveries.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2016Article
- Relationship between maternal pelvis height and other anthropometric measurements in a multisite cohort of Ugandan mothers.The Pan African medical journal · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBirth related newborn and maternal mortality/morbidity remains high in most of sub-Saharan Africa compared to the rest of the world. In this low income region there is a need for valid, low cost, easy to use mass screening tests. This study looked at the screening value of maternal: height, weight and pelvis height, for assessing the outcomes of parturition in Ugandan mothers at term.
methodsThis was a multi site cross-sectional study on mothers with singleton pregnancies in labour at various hospitals in different parts of Uganda. A summary of the details of the pregnancy, maternal height, weight and the delivery record were captured and analysed to generate descriptive and inferential (multilevel logistic regression analysis) and diagnostic (Receiver Operator Curve analysis) statistics.
resultsWe recruited 1146 mothers from all the study sites during the study period of whom 987 (86.13%) had normal deliveries and healthy babies. Mothers with adverse outcomes included 107 mothers that had caesarean section and 52 mothers who had vaginal deliveries with foetal Apgar score of ≤7 at 5 min of whom 11 had fresh still births. Maternal height (Adj OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00) and maternal pelvis height (Adj OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61-0.86) were significantly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. The combination of maternal: height (<150 cm), weight (>55.7 kg) and pelvis height (>8.95 cm) had the best diagnostic value with a combined area under the curve of 0.60.
conclusionsIt was observed that an increase in either maternal pelvis height or maternal height was associated with a significant reduction in adverse pregnancy outcomes. The cut off values of all three evaluated maternal anthropometric measurements were of low test accuracy as screening tests even when used together. Further research is needed to develop low cost screening tools for use in low income settings.
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.