ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2025
Cerebroplacental Ratio Versus Umbilicocerebral Ratio in Predicting Adverse Neonatal Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antenatal identification of "at risk" fetuses is crucial for timely intervention to aid in achieving better perinatal outcomes. One such means is the use of Doppler for fetal hemodynamic monitoring. Using the same our study aimed to compare the utility of two Doppler parameters, Cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) and Umbilicocerebral ratio (UCR), in predicting adverse neonatal outcomes. Methods: A total of 280 antenatal women participated in a prospective observational study following 28 weeks of gestation, and CPR and UCR (inverse of CPR) were determined by serial Doppler ultrasound. This was converted to gestational age-specific percentiles and Z-scores using Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) as a reference for CPR and study by Acharya et al. for UCR. Results: Out of the 277 participants analyzed, abnormal Doppler parameters were present in 27 (9.7%) women. The abnormal Doppler group had a considerably greater occurrence of adverse outcomes, including Apgar score < 7 at 1 min, small for dates, neonatal hypoglycemia, requirement of ventilatory support, prolonged hospitalization, NICU (Neonatal intensive care unit) admission, and a composite of adverse outcomes. ROC (Receiver operating characteristic) curves exhibited an AUC (Area Under the Curve) of 0.76 for both CPR and UCR and a slightly higher AUC of 0.83 and 0.85 for their centiles and Z-scores, respectively. Conclusion: Both CPR and UCR Doppler parameters are no different from each other in predicting adverse neonatal outcomes. The same holds true even on conversion to gestational age-specific centiles and Z-scores.
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.