ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2022
Estimating blood loss during cesarean delivery: A comparison of methods.
Article in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accurate estimation of blood loss during cesarean deliveries: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing visual, quantitative and calculated approaches.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Trial
- Accuracy of Blood Loss Estimation and Identification of Factors Contributing to Early Postpartum Hemorrhage Following Vaginal Delivery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Short-term maternal outcomes after intraoperative administration of prophylactic oxytocin during cesarean sections: a retrospective cohort study with a comparison of different administration protocols.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Postpartum anemia and associated factors among caesarean section women in West Gojjam zone Ethiopia 2023.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Role of Accurate Estimations of Blood Loss and Identification of Risk Factors in the Management of Early Postpartum Hemorrhage in Women Undergoing a Cesarean Section.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Preoperative Autologous Blood Donation for Rh-Negative Pregnant Women Undergoing Cesarean Sections.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2024Article
- New zeolite-based composite pads with high-volume blood absorption for early warning of postpartum hemorrhage.Narra J · 2024Article
- Prophylactic occlusion balloons of both internal iliac arteries in caesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum disorder reduces blood loss: A retrospective comparative study.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024Article
- Challenges and opportunities in patients with adult congenital heart disease, a narrative review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Obstetrical hemorrhage contributes significantly to maternal morbidity and mortality. Assessment of blood loss while undergoing cesarean sections (CS) is essential in lowering the morbidity and mortality, however this amount is commonly underestimated by the surgeon and probably the anesthetist too. Methods: This study addresses this issue by comparing three separate ways of assessing blood loss during cesarean sections. For each of 97 full-term pregnant women undergoing elective CS, blood loss was measured by the following: visual estimation by both the obstetrician and the anesthetist, weighing surgical pads pre operatively and post operatively and by calculations (multiplying the difference of pre-operative and postoperative hemoglobin values by the patient's estimated blood volume). Results: The results of this study indicated that the lowest estimated value for blood loss came from visual estimation, while the highest value came from the mathematical formula. Anesthetists were more accurate in their visual estimation of blood loss than were obstetricians. Conclusion: This study found the amount of blood loss during CS to be overestimated by the mathematical calculation and underestimated by obstetricians. However, the estimate given by anesthetists was close to that obtained by weighing pads. This underscores the need for more accurate methods of blood loss estimation in cesarean sections to be adopted.
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.