ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Effect of external cephalic version in a resource-limited setting on the Thailand-Myanmar border: a retrospective cohort with propensity score analysis.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExternal cephalic version (ECV) is recommended to reduce the risk of breech presentation at birth. This study analysed the effect of external cephalic version (ECV) or not, on breech presentation at birth in a resource-limited setting.
methodsWomen with ultrasound confirmed breech presentation from 28 weeks gestation at antenatal clinics of the Shoklo Malaria Research Unit (SMRU) and a known pregnancy outcome, from 2008 to 2018 along the Thailand-Myanmar border were included. Propensity score analysis using inverse probability weighting compared breech at birth between women who had ECV offered or not. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between ECV successful and unsuccessful versions. Adverse perinatal outcomes included cord prolapse, fetal distress, Apgar < 7 at 5 min, stillbirth and early neonatal death.
resultsAmong 504 women with breech presentation between 35–37 weeks, 330 were offered ECV and 174 were not. Breech at birth in women offered ECV was 50.9% (168/330) compared to 47.7% (83/174) in women with no ECV attempt. In other words, the rate of spontaneous version from breech to cephalic in women with no ECV attempt was 52.3% (91/174). Propensity score analysis indicated no association between ECV being offered or not and breech presentation at birth (adjusted Odds Ratio 1.23, 95% confidence interval 0.82–1.83). Caesarean section for breech 22.4% (74/330) vs 20.1% (35/174), p = 0.540; and adverse perinatal outcomes, 5.2% (17/330) vs 7.5% (13/174), p = 0.295, were similar whether ECV was offered or not. Among all women offered ECV (n = 537, range 32–40 weeks), breech at birth (4.4% (12/273) vs 90.9% (240/264), p < 0.001; caesarean section for breech 1.1% (3/273) vs 40.5% (107/264), p < 0.001; and adverse perinatal outcomes 3.7% (10/273) vs 9.1% (24/264), p = 0.010, were significantly lower in the successful vs unsuccessful groups.
conclusionECV was safely offered in a resource-limited setting. Comparison of ECV offered or not at 35 to 37 weeks suggested no benefit or harm with respect to presentation at birth in contrast to comparison of ECV success or unsuccessful at 32 to 40 weeks. Improving the ECV success rate of health care practitioners, or task shifting, could positively contribute to optimising the potential benefits of ECV.
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.