ArticleJNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association2022
Meconium-stained Amniotic Fluid among Term Deliveries in a Tertiary Care Centre: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.
Article in JNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Burden of Meconium-Stained Amniotic Fluid: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence With Descriptive Synthesis of Determinants.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Impact of Thin and Thick Intrapartum Meconium-Stained Amniotic Fluid on Cesarean Delivery and Neonatal Outcomes in Low-Risk Pregnancies.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Umbilical Granuloma: Frequency, Associated Factors, 10-Year Treatment Trends, and Effectiveness at a Single Hospital in Japan.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Although the precise aetiology of meconium-stained amniotic fluid is still unclear, risk factors include advanced gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, the prolonged second stage of labour, and intrauterine infection. It has been associated with poor perinatal outcomes including low Apgar scores, increased incidence of neonatal intensive care admission, and a high rate of perinatal death. The objective of the study was to find out the prevalence of meconium-stained amniotic fluid in term deliveries in a tertiary care centre. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was done among term deliveries in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, in a tertiary care centre from inpatient records starting from 1 November 2019 to 1 November 2020 after obtaining ethical approval from the Institutional Review Committee (Reference number: PMG1911281316). Convenience sampling was done. Point estimate and 95% Confidence Interval were calculated. Results: Out of 1699 term deliveries, meconium-stained amniotic fluid was seen in 91 (5.35%) (4.28-6.42, 95% Confidence Interval). Among these 69 (75.82%) newborns were delivered through lower segment caesarean section and 61 (67%) newborns had Grade II meconium-stained amniotic fluid. Conclusions: The prevalence of meconium-stained amniotic fluid was similar to the studies done in similar settings. Keywords: apgar score; caesarean section; gestational age; perinatal death; pregnancy.
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.