Observational studyBioMed research international2018
Maternal Body Mass Index and Anovaginal Distance in Active Phase of Term Labor.
Observational study in BioMed research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03149965 (Maternal Body Mass Index and Anovaginal Distance in Active Phase of Labor at Term Pregnancy), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Maternal Body Mass Index and Anovaginal Distance in Active Phase of Labor at Term Pregnancy
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subclassification of second-degree tears at delivery: creation and reported outcomes.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Antenatal Anovaginal Distance, a Potential Indicator of Perineal Damage during Pregnancy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Complications 8 weeks after an obstetric second-degree perineal laceration in relation to body mass index.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Body mass index and complications after obstetric anal sphincter injury, 8 weeks postpartum.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate if there was a difference in the anovaginal distance (AVD) measured by transperineal ultrasound between obese and normal weight women. MATERIAL AND
methodsA prospective observational study including 207 primiparous women at term in first stage of labor. Transperineal ultrasound with a vaginal probe was used to measure the AVD. Maternal, pregnancy, and delivery characteristics potentially associated with perineal thickness were extracted from woman's medical records. The participants were divided into three BMI groups based on maternal weight in early pregnancy: normal weight (BMI < 25), overweight (BMI 25-29.9), and obesity (BMI ≥ 30). Obese and overweight women were compared with normal weight women regarding the AVD.
resultsThe mean AVD was 24.3, 24.9, and 27.0 mm in the normal weight, overweight, and obesity group, respectively. There were no group differences in background characteristics. The AVD was significantly longer in obese women compared with normal weight women (
conclusionsThe observed longer AVD in obese women might be protective of the anal sphincter complex, explaining lower rates of anal sphincter injuries in this group. Further studies are indicated to evaluate whether the length of the AVD plays a role in the risk assessment of obstetric anal sphincter injury. The trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial registration ID is NCT03149965.
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.