Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30594170›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018

Use of pregnancy ultrasound before the 19th week scan: an analytical study based on the Icelandic Childbirth and Health Cohort.

Kristine Flo Halle, Maria Fjose, Hildur Kristjansdottir, Amalia Bjornsdottir, Linn Getz, Margret Olafia Tomasdottir, Johann Agust Sigurdsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristine Flo HalleGeneral Practice Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Håkon Jarls gate 11, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Maria FjoseGeneral Practice Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Håkon Jarls gate 11, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Hildur KristjansdottirDepartment of Midwifery, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Amalia BjornsdottirDepartment of Teacher Education, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Linn GetzGeneral Practice Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Håkon Jarls gate 11, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Margret Olafia TomasdottirDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland, and Centre of Development, Primary Health Care of the Capital Area, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Johann Agust SigurdssonGeneral Practice Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Håkon Jarls gate 11, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway. johann.a.sigurdsson@ntnu.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5646-6411
University of Iceland · ISNorwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimUse of ultrasound scans early in pregnancy is increasing, but we have limited knowledge about the actual prevalence, associated decision-making and impact on expectant women/couples in a general population. The aim of this study was to document the use of, and experiences related to, foetal scanning before the recommended 19th week scan among pregnant women in Iceland. POPULATION AND

methodsThe data come from the Icelandic Childbirth and Health Cohort Study 2009-11. A total of 1111 women attending prenatal care at primary care health centres answered questionnaires before mid-pregnancy and after birth, including questions about the number of scanning procedures during pregnancy. These might include consumer-initiated 'pregnancy confirmation scans,' scans for clinical reasons, and screening for foetal anomalies in week 11-14 which is optional in Iceland. The questionnaires also addressed parental decision-making associated with the 11-14 week screening, perception of the pre-screening information, reasons for attending or declining, and whether/how early foetal screening affected the women's concerns related to the unborn child.

resultsA total of 95% of the women reported some kind of foetal ultrasound scanning before the 19th week scan, and 64% reported two or more scans in this period. 78% of the women chose to participate in screening for foetal anomalies in week 11-14. Decision-making in relation to this screening was mainly informed by sources outside the healthcare system, and many women characterized participation as 'self-evident'. Most women felt they got sufficient information about the scope of screening, whilst information regarding potential downsides and risks was frequently perceived as insufficient. Most women who chose the 11-14 week screening reported a reassuring or neutral effect, whilst 10% of the women reported that it increased their concerns related to their unborn child.

conclusionsUltrasound scans in the first half of pregnancy are in high use in Iceland and have apparently become part of a broader pregnancy culture, encompassing both high- and low-risk pregnancies. Whether this is a favourable development or to some extent represents unwarranted medicalization, can be debated. More balanced information might be provided prior to early screening for foetal anomalies.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdolescentAdultCongenital AbnormalitiesFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansIcelandInformation Seeking BehaviorPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, FirstPregnancy Trimester, SecondUltrasonography, PrenatalYoung AdultCombined testInformed choiceMedicalizationPregnancyPrenatal screeningUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID30594170
PMCPMC6311056
OpenAlexW2907420093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.