Observational studyAnnals of medicine2025
Predictive factors for a successful external cephalic version: an observational study of four years' experience in China.
Observational study in Annals of medicine, 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.
- Letter regarding 'predictive factors for a successful externalcephalic version: an observational study of four years' experience in China'.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Predictors of a successful external cephalic version: a population-based cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo identify predictive factors affecting the outcome of external cephalic version (ECV). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe retrospective study included 222 women with singleton gestations who underwent ECV for breech presentation and transverse lie between February 2019 and July 2024. Based on the outcome of ECV, the participants were divided into two groups (successful ECV group and unsuccessful ECV group). Data included patient characteristics and pregnancy parameters were analyzed. The primary outcome was the success of ECV. In order to determine the predictive factors of ECV success, we conducted a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The adjusted odds ratio and corresponding 95% confidence interval were calculated, and a receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate the highest discriminatory capacity of variables for the ECV success.
resultsThe overall ECV success rate was 62.6%. No differences between adverse neonatal outcomes were found between the two groups. After adjusting for variables including maternal age, pre-pregnancy BMI, gravidity, parity, gestational age at ECV, fetal weight of previous pregnancy, breech type, transverse, nuchal cord, placental location, anesthesia, amniotic fluid index, duration of procedure, interval of ECV-to-delivery, and fetal weight, multivariate logistic regression analysis found that amniotic fluid index and gestational age at ECV had a positive relation with the success of ECV; Based on the receiver operating characteristic curve, the optimal cutoff value of amniotic fluid index was 144 mm, the sensitivity was 83.5%, and the specificity was 85.5%. A cutoff value of gestational age at ECV of 37 + 5 weeks yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 83.5% and 85.5%, respectively, for successful ECV.
conclusionsECV seems to be a successful, safe procedure with a high success rate. Amniotic fluid index and gestational age at ECV are the most important discriminatory indicators predictive of ECV success or failure.
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.