ArticleMaternal health, neonatology and perinatology2026
Comparison of Johnsons, Inslers formula and ultrasound for estimating fetal weight.
Article in Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate estimation of fetal weight is a crucial component of pregnancy management and plays a key role in reducing maternal and neonatal complications. Although ultrasonography is considered the gold standard, its limited availability and cost emphasize the need to assess alternative clinical methods.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 132 term pregnant women (37to 41 weeks) selected via non-probability sampling. Fetal weight was estimated prior to childbirth using three methods: ultrasonography (performed within the last two weeks of the third trimester to minimize the impact of rapid fetal weight gain closer to term), Johnson's formula, and Insler's formula and was compared with the actual birth weight immediately after childbirth. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 24, with descriptive statistics and regression.
resultsThe mean ± SD of estimated fetal weights (EFW) obtained via third-trimester ultrasonography and based on the Johnson and Insler formulas were 3164 ± 382.95 g, 3161.27 ± 302.90 g, and 3309.35 ± 374.05 g, respectively. Regarding diagnostic accuracy, the Johnson formula showed a precision of 69.70% for neonates < 3000 g and 71.21% for macrosomia (> 3500 g), the Insler formula showed a precision of 75.76% for neonates < 3000 g and 68.94% for macrosomia (> 3500 g). In the multivariate regression analysis of estimated fetal weight using the Johnson formula, only fundal height remained a significant independent predictor (β = 149.43, P < 0.001).
conclusionAlthough ultrasound is the most accurate method for estimating fetal weight, with the smallest mean difference from the actual weight, clinical methods, particularly the Insler method for normal weight pregnancies and the Johnson method for ruling out macrosomia, have acceptable accuracy. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.