ReviewPhysiological measurement2020
A review of fetal cardiac monitoring, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries.
Review in Physiological measurement, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Remote Fetal Monitoring on Maternal-Fetal Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Pooled it
- Identifying High-Risk Pre-Term Pregnancies Using the Fetal Heart Rate and Machine Learning.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Next-Generation Fetal Heart Monitoring: Leveraging Neural Sequential Modeling for Ultrasound Analysis.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2026Article
- Real-time quality feedback on Doppler data for community midwives using edge-AI.Machine learning. Health · 2025Article
- Correlation of suspicious and pathological cardiotocography with umbilical cord blood gas parameters: A prospective cohort study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Development and evaluation of an online cardiotocography course tailored to LMIC settings: a feasibility study conducted in a tertiary care hospital in Sri Lanka.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Advanced Predictive Analytics for Fetal Heart Rate Variability Using Digital Twin Integration.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Classification of the Source of 1D Doppler Ultrasound Activity in Fetal Monitoring.Computing in cardiology · 2025Article
- Exploring parental factors influencing low birth weight on the 2022 CDC natality dataset.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is limited evidence regarding the utility of fetal monitoring during pregnancy, particularly during labor and delivery. Developed countries rely on consensus 'best practices' of obstetrics and gynecology professional societies to guide their protocols and policies. Protocols are often driven by the desire to be as safe as possible and avoid litigation, regardless of the cost of downstream treatment. In high-resource settings, there may be a justification for this approach. In low-resource settings, in particular, interventions can be costly and lead to adverse outcomes in subsequent pregnancies. Therefore, it is essential to consider the evidence and cost of different fetal monitoring approaches, particularly in the context of treatment and care in low-to-middle income countries. This article reviews the standard methods used for fetal monitoring, with particular emphasis on fetal cardiac assessment, which is a reliable indicator of fetal well-being. An overview of fetal monitoring practices in low-to-middle income counties, including perinatal care access challenges, is also presented. Finally, an overview of how mobile technology may help reduce barriers to perinatal care access in low-resource settings is provided.
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.