ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
Standardization and quality control of the introduction of a noninvasive cardiac output monitor for pregnancy measurements in a low- and middle-income country.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 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.
- Standardization and quality control of the introduction of a noninvasive cardiac output monitor for pregnancy measurements in a low- and middle-income country.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere is increasing awareness of the role of the maternal cardiovascular system in complicated pregnancies. Despite the high disease burden, noninvasive cardiac output monitors have not been used extensively in low- and middle-income countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality control of the use of the ultrasonic cardiac output monitor (USCOM) 1A® in a LMIC (low an middle income country). MATERIAL AND
methodsThis was a quality assessment study of the introduction of the USCOM 1A® to measure maternal hemodynamic indices. Inter-observer agreement was assessed across all four study sites by intraclass correlation coefficient. Quality control was assessed using pre-defined acceptability criteria, rated by 2 independent scorers.
resultsOn average, nurses or midwives needed to obtain 30.4 (range 24-36) Doppler waveform recordings to be deemed competent to undertake USCOM 1A® measurements. There was very good inter-observer agreement across all 4 sites (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.86-0.93, all p < 0.001). A total of 138 images were randomly selected for quality review. Overall, 79 (89.8%) images were considered acceptable by both scorers; 4 (6.9%) were considered unacceptable by both scorers; and there was disagreement in 5 (5.7%) cases. Overall agreement was 94.3%. Agreement as assessed by Fleiss' kappa, was moderate (0.585 [95% CI 0.376-0.794], p < 0.001).
conclusionsUsing a robust learning package and clearly defined image criteria, a novel cardiac-output monitor can be successfully introduced into low- and middle-income countries, in the context of research. Ongoing quality control measures are imperative to maintain the integrity of planned future studies using USCOM 1A®.
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.