ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2025
Diagnostic Accuracy of Estimated Fetal Weight Discordance in Predicting Birthweight Discordance in Monochorionic Twins: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of sonographic estimated fetal weight discordance (EFWD) ≥ 20% in predicting birthweight discordance (BWD) ≥ 20% (i.e., selective fetal growth restriction [sFGR]) in monochorionic (MC) twin pregnancies.
methodRetrospective cohort study including uncomplicated MC twin pairs (n = 213) and MC twins with sFGR (n = 134), with available ultrasound within 14 days of birth approximately 2002 and 2023 in our center. Within 14 and 7 days of birth, we calculated sensitivity and specificity. In a subgroup of twins with available ultrasound within 3 days of birth, the absolute error of BWD was calculated (BWD-EFWD).
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity of EFWD ≥ 20% within 14 days of birth in predicting BWD ≥ 20% were 84% (95% CI 76-89) and 85% (95% CI 79-89), respectively. Ultrasounds available within 7 days of birth (n = 192/347) showed comparable diagnostic accuracies (sensitivity 85% [95% CI 75-92], and specificity 81% [95% CI 73-88]). Among twins with available ultrasound within 3 days of birth (n = 90/347), the absolute error of BWD was -2.0% (SD 8.0), indicating a mean overestimation of BWD.
conclusionIn MC twins with sFGR, the accuracy of sonographic EFWD ≥ 20% in predicting BWD ≥ 20%, is relatively high. BWD is overestimated by an average of two percentage points within 3 days of birth.
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.