ReviewAmerican journal of perinatology2025
Fetal Growth Restriction: A Pragmatic Approach.
Review in American journal of perinatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
An accurate diagnosis of fetal growth restriction relies on a precise estimation of gestational age based on a carefully obtained history as well as early ultrasound, since a difference of just a few days can lead to a significant error. There is a continuum of risk for adverse outcome that depends on the certainty of dates and presence or absence of comorbidities, in addition to the estimated fetal weight percentile and the umbilical artery waveform. The results of several studies, most notably the TRUFFLE trial, demonstrate that optimal management of fetal growth restriction with an abnormal umbilical artery waveform requires daily electronic fetal heart rate monitoring, and this monitoring does not require computerized interpretation. The role of ductus venosus waveform, biophysical profile, and middle cerebral artery waveform is less clear, and the results of these three modalities should be interpreted with caution. · A correct diagnosis of fetal growth restriction requires a very precise estimate of gestational age.. · In the presence of abnormal umbilical artery Doppler, the cornerstone of surveillance is daily electronic fetal heart rate monitoring.. · Surveillance with biophysical profile, ductus venosus waveform, and middle cerebral artery waveform are less important than daily electronic fetal heart rate monitoring..
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.