ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2022
Development of prediction models for successful external cephalic version and delivery outcome.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fetal cephalohematoma following external cephalic version: a case report.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Predictors of a successful external cephalic version: a population-based cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Predictive factors for a successful external cephalic version: an observational study of four years' experience in China.Annals of medicine · 2025Observational
- Ultrasound Assessment of Breech Engagement: Breech Progression Angle and Prediction of External Cephalic Version Success.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Factors influencing the effect of external cephalic version: a retrospective nationwide cohort analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop prediction models for the chance of successful external cephalic version (ECV) and delivery outcome. STUDY
designThis is a single-center retrospective study including 350 pregnant women with a singleton non-cephalic pregnancy at or after 36 weeks of gestational age. We selected 22 factors for ECV prediction and 21 for delivery outcome after successful ECV prediction as candidate predictors. Multivariable logistic regression with a stepwise backward selection procedure was used to construct a prediction model for the chance of successful ECV and the other for the delivery outcome. The discrimination and calibration of the models were assessed and internal validation was done with bootstrapping.
resultsECV was successfully performed in 232 cases (66.3%) among 343 women. Eight predictive factors were identified to be associated with a successful ECV: Gestational week at ECV < 39 weeks, multiparous, BMI before pregnancy < 22 kg/m
conclusionWe validated a prediction model for ECV and delivery outcome, showing that the model's overall performance is good. This can be used in clinical practice after external validation.
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.