ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Relationship between the natural cessation time of umbilical cord pulsation in full-term newborns delivered vaginally and maternal-neonatal outcomes: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Care of the Newborn and Cord During the Third Stage of Labour (Scientific Impact Paper No. 78).BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Review
- From knowledge to action: understanding midwives' challenges in implementing delayed cord clamping in Northern Ghana.Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo analyze the impact of the time of natural cessation of the umbilical cord on maternal and infant outcomes in order to explore the time of clamping that would be beneficial to maternal and infant outcomes.
methodsThe study was a cohort study and pregnant women who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department of Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from September 2020 to September 2021. Analysis using Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test, Pearson's Chi-squared test, generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) and repeated measures ANOVA. If the difference between groups was statistically significant, the Bonferroni test was then performed. A two-sided test of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsA total of 345 pregnants were included in this study. The subjects were divided into the ≤60 seconds group (n = 134), the 61-89 seconds group (n = 106) and the ≥90 seconds group (n = 105) according to the time of natural arrest of the umbilical cord. There was no statistically significant difference in the amount of postpartum hemorrhage and the need for iron, medication, or supplements in the postpartum period between the different cord spontaneous arrest time groups for mothers (P > 0.05). The weight of the newborns in the three groups was (3316.27 ± 356.70) g, (3387.26 ± 379.20) g, and (3455.52 ± 363.78) g, respectively, and the number of days of cord detachment was 12.00 (8.00, 15.75) days, 10.00 (7.00, 15.00) days and 9.00 (7.00, 13.00) days, respectively, as the time of natural cessation of the cord increased. The neonatal lymphocyte ratio, erythrocyte pressure, and hemoglobin reached a maximum in the 61-89 s group at (7.41 ± 2.16) %, (61.77 ± 8.17) % and (194.52 ± 25.84) g/L, respectively. Lower incidence of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia in the 61-89 s group compared to the ≥90s group 0 vs 4.8 (P < 0.05).
conclusionsIn full-term singleton vaginal births, maternal and infant outcomes are better when waiting for 61-89 s after birth for the cord to stop pulsating naturally, suggesting that we can wait up to 90s for the cord to stop pulsating naturally, and if the cord does not stop pulsating after 90s, artificial weaning may be more beneficial to maternal and infant outcomes.
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.