ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2017
Multidisciplinary consensus on screening for, diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction in the Netherlands.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations of severe adverse perinatal outcomes among continuous birth weight percentiles on different birth weight charts: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Trial
- Cost-Effectiveness of Routine Third Trimester Ultrasound Screening for Fetal Growth Restriction Compared to Care as Usual in Low-Risk Pregnancies: A Pragmatic Nationwide Stepped-Wedge Cluster-Randomized Trial in The Netherlands (the IRIS Study).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Corpus luteum number and the maternal renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system as determinants of utero-placental (vascular) development: the Rotterdam Periconceptional Cohort.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of routine third trimester ultrasonography to reduce adverse perinatal outcomes in low risk pregnancy (the IRIS study): nationwide, pragmatic, multicentre, stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Trial
- Migraines, Obesity, and Pregnancy: Who Is the Villain and Who Is the Victim?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Gestational Weight Gain, Pregnancy Related Complications and the Short-Term Risks for the Offspring.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Association of Pre-Pregnancy Obesity and COVID-19 with Poor Pregnancy Outcome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- First-trimester maternal haemodynamic adaptation to pregnancy and placental, embryonic and fetal development: the prospective observational Rotterdam Periconception cohort.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScreening for, diagnosis and management of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) is often performed in multidisciplinary collaboration. However, variation in screening methods, diagnosis and management of IUGR may lead to confusion. In the Netherlands two monodisciplinary guidelines on IUGR do not fully align. To facilitate effective collaboration between different professionals in perinatal care, we undertook a Delphi study with uniform recommendations as our primary result, focusing on issues that are not aligned or for which specifications are lacking in the current guidelines.
methodsWe conducted a Delphi study in three rounds. A purposively sampled selection of 56 panellists participated: 27 representing midwife-led care and 29 obstetrician-led care. Consensus was defined as agreement between the professional groups on the same answer and among at least 70% of the panellists within groups.
resultsPer round 51 or 52 (91% - 93%) panellists responded. This has led to consensus on 27 issues, leading to four consensus based recommendations on screening for IUGR in midwife-led care and eight consensus based recommendations on diagnosis and eight on management in obstetrician-led care. The multidisciplinary project group decided on four additional recommendations as no consensus was reached by the panel. No recommendations could be made about induction of labour versus expectant monitoring, nor about the choice for a primary caesarean section.
conclusionsWe reached consensus on recommendations for care for IUGR within a multidisciplinary panel. These will be implemented in a study on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of routine third trimester ultrasound for monitoring fetal growth. Research is needed to evaluate the effects of implementation of these recommendations on perinatal outcomes.
trial registrationNTR4367 .
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.