Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
The SAVE FGR study: Short term variation Analysis versus Visual Evaluation of cardiotocography in early-onset Fetal Growth Restriction to trigger expedited birth - study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.
Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06010238 (Short Term Variation Analysis Versus Visual Evaluation of Cardiotocography in Fetal Growth Restriction), which is not on this 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.
Short Term Variation Analysis Versus Visual Evaluation of Cardiotocography in Fetal Growth Restriction
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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly-onset fetal growth restriction (eoFGR) is associated with high risks of adverse outcomes and a key dilemma in clinical obstetrical practice in determining the optimal timing of birth. Cardiotocography (CTG) is an important tool for antepartum fetal surveillance and typically assessed visually. Computerised CTG including short term variation (STV) analysis offers an objective analysis by quantifying the beat-to-beat variation in the fetal heart rate. Currently, there is a lack of randomized studies of sufficient power that examine whether birth intervention based on such quantified STV improves outcomes by ensuring timely intervention. The aim of this study is to compare perinatal and long-term outcomes up to two years of corrected age, from birth based on monitoring the fetal condition using visual evaluation of the CTG only versus CTG supported by computerised STV analysis.
methodsThis study is a multicenter stepped wedge cluster randomized trial including women with singleton pregnancies between 24 and 32 weeks of gestation with eoFGR (abdominal circumference or estimated fetal weight below p10 AND umbilical artery pulsatility index above p95) with an indication for fetal CTG monitoring. In the control period, CTG monitoring is performed through visual evaluation and birth is expedited when the CTG exhibits signs of hypoxia, such as a reduced heart rate variability or repetitive, unprovoked decelerations. In the intervention period, visual evaluation of the CTG is supported by STV analysis, with birth expedited if the STV is below 3.5 ms (below 29 weeks’ gestation) or 4.0 ms (between 29 and 32 weeks’ gestation), or if other signs of hypoxia are observed visually. The intended sample size is at least 16 clusters and 800 participants. Coprimary outcomes are perinatal death and neurodevelopmental impairment at two years of corrected age based on the Ages and Stages Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include mode of birth, neonatal morbidity, maternal health and infant health outcomes until two years CA. Analysis will be intention-to-treat and per-protocol. DISCUSSION: This study will provide insight if STV-analysis in the timing of birth in pregnancies complicated by eoFGR improves perinatal outcomes and neurodevelopmental outcomes until two years of corrected age.
trial registrationProspectively registered at August 24, 2023. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06010238.
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.