Observational studyScientific reports2024
Updating of pelvimetry standards in modern obstetrics.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of supine vs. hip- and knee-flexed position on anteroposterior diameter and inclination of the female pelvic outlet: an MRI-based 3D reconstruction study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- MRI-based pseudo-CT sequences as a radiation-free alternative to CT for obstetric pelvimetry: a proof-of-concept study.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Comparison of vaginal breech deliveries with and without magnetic resonance imaging in primigravidas: a retrospective cohort analysis and literature review.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Review
- Accuracy of pelvic bone segmentation for 3d printing: a study of segmentation accuracy based on anatomic landmarks to evaluate the influence of the observer.3D printing in medicine · 2024Article
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
Clinical value of pelvimetry in modern obstetrics practices has never been established and normal values are set since the middle of the twentieth century. The aim of this study was to describe current dimensions of pelvis in a female French Caucasian population. A retrospective, bi-centric observational study was conducted from August 2013 to August 2019 in two French departments of Obstetrics. We included all Caucasian women who had a computed tomography pelvimetry during pregnancy. The primary outcome was the values of the obstetric transverse diameter, obstetric conjugate diameter and bispinous diameter. Five hundred and fifty-one CT pelvimetries were analyzed. The median Obstetric Transverse Diameter (OTD) was 12.41 cm and the 3rd percentile was 11 cm. The median Obstetric Conjugate Diameter (OCD) was 12.2 cm and the 3rd percentile was 10.5 cm. The median Bispinous Diameter (BSD) in our data collection was 10.9 cm and the 3rd percentile was 9.3 cm. A significant correlation coefficient between women's height and OTD, OCD and BSD was found. In our study, the OCD and the BSD have not evolved since the middle of the twentieth century. The obstetric transverse diameter was smaller than the standard currently used.
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.