ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
Clinical utility of inpatient monitoring for reduced fetal movements in the absence of fetal pathology.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence on the follow-up of women with reduced fetal movements (RFM) and physiological fetal parameters at initial assessment is limited. We evaluated whether inpatient monitoring provides additional clinical value in this population. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this retrospective study, women with a first episode of RFM and physiological fetal assessment (by means of cardiotocography, single deepest vertical pocket, estimated fetal weight, and umbilical artery Doppler) between January 2017 and December 2025 were identified and their clinical course and inpatient monitoring was analyzed. Patients with fetal pathology, recurrent RFM, or multiple gestation were excluded. Clinical outcomes were compared with a matched control cohort.
resultsOf 154 identified cases with RFM, 78 women met our inclusion criteria. Median gestational age was 36 + 2 weeks (IQR 33 + 0-37 + 5) and median hospital stay 1.5 days (IQR 1-2). In 74 (94.87%) patients, inpatient monitoring yielded no additional findings and did not change management; in 4 (5.13%) cases, changes in the clinical course occurred, but were attributable to independent obstetric factors (hypertension, premature rupture of membranes, impending uterine rupture, recurrent RFM). No distinct differences in birth outcomes between patients with RFM and controls were observed.
conclusionIn women presenting with RFM and no evidence of fetal compromise, inpatient monitoring rarely influenced clinical management. Outpatient follow-up with counselling may be a feasible alternative pending further validation.
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.