ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2020
Incidences of obstetric outcomes and sample size calculations: A Danish national registry study based on all deliveries from 2008 to 2015.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of prenatal exercise on gestational weight gain, obstetric and neonatal outcomes: FitMum randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Trial
- Obstetric and neonatal conditions and associations with early skin-to-skin contact - a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- A scoping review on continuing professional development programs for midwives: optimising management of obstetric emergencies and complications.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The effect of brief educational intervention on level of awareness about chronic kidney disease among type-2 diabetes mellitus patients in Prince Sultan Military Hospital, Taif.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2024Article
- How often will midwives and obstetricians experience obstetric emergencies or high-risk deliveries: a national cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Incidences of obstetric outcomes and sample size calculations: A Danish national registry study based on all deliveries from 2008 to 2015.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn high-income countries the majority of pregnancies have a good outcome, and many adverse obstetric outcomes rarely occur. This makes demonstrating clinically relevant and statistically significant effects of new interventions a challenge. The objective of the study was to report incidences of important obstetric outcomes and to calculate sample sizes for tentative studies. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe study was a registry-based study. Data were retrieved from the Danish Medical Birth Registry and included all deliveries in Denmark from 2008 to 2015. The total population included 465 919 deliveries. The study population comprised intended vaginal deliveries with a single fetus in cephalic presentation at term (n = 381 567). Incidences were reported for 20 outcomes considering the relevance for the patients and the severity of the outcomes. We calculated the sample sizes required in tentative obstetric studies to detect risk reductions of 25 and 50%, for tests at the 5% level, using a power of 80 and 90%. For the randomized controlled trials we calculated the sample size required for comparing two proportions with equal-sized groups. For the cohort study we calculated the sample size also required for two proportions but with unequal sized groups. Outcome measures for sample size calculation were neonatal mortality, Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes and emergency cesarean section.
resultsThe incidence of neonatal mortality, Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes and emergency cesarean section was 0.05, 0.58 and 10.5%, respectively. Using neonatal mortality as the outcome in a tentative randomized controlled trial with an expected risk reduction of 50% and power of 80%, our calculation showed a sample size of 195 036 deliveries. Using Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes or emergency cesarean section as the outcome, 16 254 and 818 deliveries, respectively, were required. In tentative cohort studies, the required sample sizes were larger due to the unequal proportion of exposed/non-exposed women.
conclusionsMost adverse obstetric outcomes occur rarely; thus, very large sample sizes are required to achieve adequate statistical power in randomized controlled trials. Multicenter studies, international collaborations or alternative study designs to randomized controlled trials could be considered.
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.