ArticleBritish journal of haematology2025
Laboratory assessment of fetomaternal haemorrhage and Rh immune globulin management: Canadian practice and scoping review.
Article in British journal of haematology, 2025. 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.
- Fetomaternal hemorrhage in monochorionic diamniotic twins at 37+ weeks' gestation: A rare complication.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- Laboratory assessment of fetomaternal haemorrhage and Rh immune globulin management: Canadian practice and scoping review.British journal of haematology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fetomaternal haemorrhage (FMH) in RhD-negative individuals can lead to alloimmunization with future antibody-mediated destruction of fetal red blood cells. Accurate estimation of FMH is essential for guiding the dose of Rh immune globulin and mitigating alloimmunization. We conducted a national survey and performed a scoping review to determine the availability, technical characteristics and clinical limitations of FMH tests. We describe the evolution of FMH testing, including the qualitative methods (alpha-fetoprotein level, microscopic weak D test, enzyme-linked antiglobulin test, rosette test, gel agglutination cards) and the quantitative methods (Kleihauer-Betke test, flow cytometry assays). Although the rosette test is the most commonly used qualitative method, it may yield false-negative results with fetal RhD variants or false-positives with maternal RhD variants or a positive direct antiglobulin test. Kleihauer-Betke test is the most commonly used quantitative test but has limitations: It is labour-intensive, prone to interobserver variability and can overestimate FMH when maternal F-cell levels are elevated (e.g. haemoglobinopathies). While modifications to the Kleihauer-Betke test can enhance accuracy, flow cytometry remains the most accurate quantification method. With limitations in flow cytometry availability, efficient sample prioritization and pragmatic referral protocols are required. We propose an algorithm for FMH test selection to support decision-making across clinical contexts and resource settings.
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.