ArticlePaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2018
Persistent inaccuracies in completion of medical certificates of stillbirth: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Worth the paper it's written on? A cross-sectional study of Medical Certificate of Stillbirth accuracy in the UK.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Persistent inaccuracies in completion of medical certificates of stillbirth: A cross-sectional study.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe UK Medical Certificate of Stillbirth (MCS) records information relevant to the cause of stillbirth of infants ≥24 weeks' gestation. A cross-sectional audit demonstrated widespread inaccuracies in MCS completion in 2009 in North West England. A repeat study was conducted to assess whether practice had improved following introduction of a regional care pathway.
methods266 MCS issued in 14 North West England obstetric units during 2015 were studied retrospectively. Cause of death was assigned following review of information available at the time of MCS completion. This was compared to that documented on the MCS, and to data from 2009.
resultsTwenty-three certificates were excluded (20 inadequate data, 3 late miscarriages). 118/243 (49%) MCS contained major errors. Agreement between the MCS and adjudicated cause of stillbirth was fair (Kappa 0.31; 95% CI 0.24, 0.38) and unchanged from 2009 (0.29). In 2015, excluding 34 terminations of pregnancy, the proportion of MCSs documenting "unexplained" stillbirths (113/211; 54%) was reduced compared to 2009 (158/213; 74%); causality could be assigned after case note review in 78% cases. Recognition of fetal growth restriction (FGR) as a cause of stillbirth improved (2015: 30/211; 14% vs 2009: 1/213; 0.5%), although 71% cases were missed. 47% MCSs following termination of pregnancy documented an iatrogenic primary cause of death.
conclusionsCompletion of MCSs remains inaccurate, particularly in recognition of FGR as a cause of stillbirth. Detailed case note review before issuing the MCS could dramatically improve the usefulness of included information; evaluation of practitioner education programmes/internal feedback systems are recommended.
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.