ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Correcting for measurement error in assessing gestational age in a low-resource setting: a regression calibration approach.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Measurement error in gestational age (GA) may bias the association of GA with a health outcome. Ultrasound-based GA is considered the gold standard and is not readily available in low-resource settings. We corrected for measurement error in GA based on fundal height (FH) and date of last menstrual period (LMP) using ultrasound from the sub-cohort and adjusted for the bias in associating GA with neonatal mortality and low birth weight (< 2,500 grams, LBW). Methods: We used data collected from 01/2015 to 09/2019 from pregnant women enrolled at two public hospitals in Siaya county, Kenya ( Results: Calibration improved the precision of LMP (correlation coefficient, Conclusion: Calibrating FH/LMP-based GA improved the accuracy and precision of GA estimates and strengthened the association of GA with neonatal mortality/LBW. When assessing GA, neonatal public health and clinical interventions may benefit from calibration modeling in settings where ultrasound may not be fully available.
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.