Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34888132›Full record

ArticleAustralasian journal of ultrasound in medicine2021

A survey of current practice in reporting third trimester fetal biometry and Doppler in Australia and New Zealand.

Debra Paoletti, Lillian Smyth, Susan Westerway, Jon Hyett, Ritu Mogra, Stephen Haslett, Michael Peek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine, 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. Review
  2. Collaboration in the time of COVID.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2021
    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.

Debra PaolettiANU Medical School College of Health and Medicine The Australian National University Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1748-2344
Lillian SmythANU Medical School College of Health and Medicine The Australian National University Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2679-2969
Susan WesterwayFaculty of Dentistry & Health Sciences Charles Sturt University Wagga Wagga New South Wales Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5104-073X
Jon HyettRPA Women and Babies Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Camperdown New South Wales Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8019-1289
Ritu MograRPA Women and Babies Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Camperdown New South Wales Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5421-4694
Stephen HaslettResearch School of Finance Actuarial Studies and Statistics The Australian National University Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2775-5468
Michael PeekANU Medical School College of Health and Medicine The Australian National University Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6055-5129

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInconsistent reporting practices in third trimester ultrasound, the choice of reference charts in particular, have the potential to misdiagnose abnormal fetal growth. But this may lead to unnecessary anxiety and confusion amongst patients and clinicians and ultimately influence clinical management. Therefore, we sought to determine the extent of variability in choice of fetal biometry and Doppler reference charts and reporting practices in Australia and New Zealand.

methodsClinicians performing and/or reporting obstetric ultrasound were invited to answer questions about fetal biometry and Doppler charts in a web-based survey.

resultsAt least four population-based charts are in current use. The majority of respondents (78%) report the percentile for known gestational age (GA) alongside measurements and 63% using a cut-off of estimated fetal weight (EFW) < 10

conclusionThis survey revealed inconsistencies in choice of reference chart and reporting practices. The potential for misdiagnosis of abnormal fetal growth remains a significant issue.

Indexed as

biometryDopplerfetal measurementobstetric ultrasoundreference charts

Identifiers

PMID34888132
PMCPMC8591275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.