Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34063793›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

A Systematic Review of Methodology Used in Studies Aimed at Creating Charts of Fetal Brain Structures.

Vera Donadono, Angelo Cavallaro, Nia W Roberts, Christos Ioannou, Aris T Papageorghiou, Raffaele Napolitano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Reproducibility of assessment of full-dilatation Cesarean section scar in women undergoing second-trimester screening for preterm birth.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2022
    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

6 authors.

Vera DonadonoFetal Medicine Unit, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London WC1E 6DB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1364-6479
Angelo CavallaroNuffield Department of Women's & Reproductive Health, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
Nia W RobertsBodleian Health Care Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1142-6440
Christos IoannouNuffield Department of Women's & Reproductive Health, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
Aris T PapageorghiouNuffield Department of Women's & Reproductive Health, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
Raffaele NapolitanoFetal Medicine Unit, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London WC1E 6DB, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9434-7678

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation 49038National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) not reported
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ultrasound-based assessment of the fetal nervous system is routinely recommended at the time of the mid-trimester anatomy scan or at different gestations based on clinical indications. This review evaluates the methodological quality of studies aimed at creating charts for fetal brain structures obtained by ultrasound, as poor methodology could explain substantial variability in percentiles reported. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched from January 1970 to January 2021 to select studies on singleton fetuses, where the main aim was to construct charts on one or more clinically relevant structures obtained in the axial plane: parieto-occipital fissure, Sylvian fissure, anterior ventricle, posterior ventricle, transcerebellar diameter, and cisterna magna. Studies were scored against 29 predefined methodological quality criteria to identify the risk of bias. In total, 42 studies met the inclusion criteria, providing data for 45,626 fetuses. Substantial heterogeneity was identified in the methodological quality of included studies, and this may explain the high variability in centiles reported. In 80% of the studies, a high risk of bias was found in more than 50% of the domains scored. In conclusion, charts to be used in clinical practice and research should have an optimal study design in order to minimise the risk of bias and to allow comparison between different studies. We propose to use charts from studies with the highest methodological quality.

Indexed as

anterior ventriclecisterna magnagrowthparieto-occipital fissureposterior ventricleSylvian fissuretranscerebellar diameterultrasound

Identifiers

PMID34063793
PMCPMC8223776

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.