Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35856050›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2022

Midwives' ability during third stage of childbirth to estimate postpartum haemorrhage.

Ingela Wiklund, Soledad Alarcón Fernández, Markus Jonsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2022. 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
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ingela WiklundDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, SE-18288 Stockholm, Sweden.
Soledad Alarcón FernándezDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, SE-18288 Stockholm, Sweden.
Markus JonssonCentre for Cultural Evolution, Stockholm University, SE-10661 Stockholm, Sweden.
Dalarna University · SEKarolinska Institutet · SEStockholm University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Correctly assessing the amount of blood loss is crucial in order to adequately treat postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) at an early stage and diminish any related symptoms and/or complications.The aim of our study is to analyse correctness in visually estimated blood loss during labour and to measure the differences between subjectively measured and weighted blood losses (ml). Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: A Swedish maternity unit with 6000 annual births. Participants: Midwives employed at a big maternity unit at a hospital in northern Stockholm, Sweden. Intervention: Midwives assisting 192 vaginal births were asked to visually estimate the blood loss from the assisted delivery. Coasters and sanitary pads were weighed following the birth. We analysed if there were any differences between subjective measured blood loss (ml) and weighted blood loss. These two methods were also compared to quantify concordance between estimated blood volume and the actual volume. Findings: The number of overestimates of blood loss was 45.3 % ( Conclusion: There was both underestimation and overestimation of blood loss. We found small but significant overestimates in PPH < 300 ml (16 ml). In PPH > 300 ml, there was a small but not significant underestimates (34 ml). Based upon our findings, we conclude that it is reasonable to start weighing blood loss when it exceeds 300 ml.

Indexed as

BirthEstimation of blood lossPostpartum haemorrhage

Identifiers

PMID35856050
PMCPMC9287154
OpenAlexW4283791455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.