ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2025
Accuracy of ultrasound estimation of fetal weight in twin pregnancy.
Article in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 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.
- Accuracy of ultrasound estimation of fetal weight in twin pregnancy.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the accuracy of formulas for estimation of fetal weight in twin pregnancy.
methodsInclusion criteria from the ESPRiT twin cohort were twin pregnancies that resulted in live-born twins without congenital anomalies or twin-twin transfusion syndrome, ultrasound examination within 3 days of delivery, birth weight (BW) > 500 g and gestational age > 24 weeks. A total of 63 formulas using various combinations of abdominal circumference (AC), femur length (FL), biparietal diameter (BPD) and head circumference (HC) for the estimation of fetal weight (EFW), were compared to BW for accuracy in 226 twin pregnancies/452 fetuses.
resultsUsing median percentage error (MPE), the most accurate formulas were the Hadlock formulas (1984, 1985 with MPE < 1%) incorporating AC, HC, and FL. The INTERGROWTH-21st formula, which incorporates AC and HC, marginally underestimated BW (MPE -3.7%). The Hadlock formulas were more likely to overestimate BW than underestimate it. Using small-for-gestational (SGA, EFW < 5th centile), the sensitivity for detection of low BW (BW < 5th centile) was 92%, 81% and 89% for the Hadlock 1984, Hadlock 1985 and INTERGROWTH-21st formulas, respectively. SGA prevalence was noted to be higher for the INTERGROWTH-21st formula for fetal factors.
conclusionAmong 63 proposed formulas for EFW, the Hadlock formulas incorporating HC, AC and FL were the most accurate in twins. However, the INTERGROWTH-21st standard, which incorporates AC and HC, did not show lower detection rates for LBW. The frequency and intensity of twin ultrasound surveillance is such that restriction of ultrasound examination to two parameters in ultrasound could be recommended without diminution of accuracy.
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.