The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Doppler ultrasound for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abnormal waveforms from Doppler ultrasound may indicate poor fetal prognosis. It is also possible that Doppler ultrasound could encourage inappropriate early delivery. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of Doppler ultrasound in high risk pregnancies on obstetric care and fetal outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of Doppler ultrasound for the investigation of umbilical artery waveforms in high risk pregnancies compared to no Doppler ultrasound. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed and data were extracted by both reviewers. Study authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies involving nearly 7000 women were included. The trials were generally of good quality. Compared to no Doppler ultrasound, Doppler ultrasound in high risk pregnancy (especially those complicated by hypertension or presumed impaired fetal growth) was associated with a trend to a reduction in perinatal deaths (odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 1.01). The use of Doppler ultrasound was also associated with fewer inductions of labour (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.93) and fewer admissions to hospital (odds ratio 0.56, 95% 0.43 to 0.72), without reports of adverse effects. No difference was found for fetal distress in labour (odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.13) or caesarean delivery (odds ratio 0.94, 95% 0.82 to 1.06). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The use of Doppler ultrasound in high risk pregnancies appears to improve a number of obstetric care outcomes and appears promising in helping to reducing perinatal deaths.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy
Regitz-Zagrosek, V., Roos-Hesselink, J. W., Bauersachs, J., Blomström-Lundqvist, C., Cífková, R., De Bonis, M., Iung, B., Johnson, M. R., Kintscher, U., Kranke, P., et al. (2018) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy340 · Cited by 2,292
ESC Guidelines on the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy
Endorsed by the European Society of Gynecology (ESG), T. A. F. E. P. C. (., Authors/Task Force Members, Regitz-Zagrosek, V., Blomstrom Lundqvist, C., Borghi, C., Cifkova, R., Ferreira, R., Foidart, J.-M., Gibbs, J. S. R., Gohlke-Baerwolf, C., et al. (2011) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehr218 · Cited by 1,924
Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan
Salomon, L. J., Alfirevic, Z., Berghella, V., Bilardo, C., Hernandez‐Andrade, E., Johnsen, S. L., Kalache, K., Leung, K. ‐., Malinger, G., Munoz, H., et al. (2011) · Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1002/uog.8831 · Cited by 1,006
Self-citationIntrauterine growth restriction: new concepts in antenatal surveillance, diagnosis, and management
Figueras, F., & Gardosi, J. (2011) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.08.055 · Cited by 485
Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies
Alfirevic, Z., Stampalija, T., & Dowswell, T. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd007529.pub4 · Cited by 304
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Alfirevic, Z., & Neilson, J. P.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
- Published
- 1996-10-21
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- CD000073-CD000073
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2111430949
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 0
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Status
- Retracted
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Doppler ultrasound for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd000073
- The paper
- Alfirevic, Z., & Neilson, J. P. (1996). Doppler ultrasound for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd000073
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.