Cited by 41Pregnancy and preeclampsia studiesMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsPreterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis

Regimens of fetal surveillance for impaired fetal growth

Open access
Grivell, Rosalie M, Wong, Lufee, Bhatia, Vineesh·2012·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Background Policies and protocols for fetal surveillance in the pregnancy where impaired fetal growth is suspected vary widely, with numerous combinations of different surveillance methods.Objectives To assess the effects of antenatal fetal surveillance regimens on important perinatal and maternal outcomes.Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (29 February 2012).Selection criteria Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing the effects of described antenatal fetal surveillance regimens.Data collection and analysis Review authors R Grivell and L Wong independently assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data.Main results We included one trial of 167 women and their babies. This trial was a pilot study recruiting alongside another study, therefore, a separate sample size was not calculated. The trial compared a twice-weekly surveillance regimen (biophysical profile, nonstress tests, umbilical artery and middle cerebral artery Doppler and uterine artery Doppler) with the same regimen applied fortnightly (both groups had growth assessed fortnightly). There were insufficient data to assess this review's primary infant outcome of composite perinatal mortality and serious morbidity (although there were no perinatal deaths) and no difference was seen in the primary maternal outcome of emergency caesarean section for fetal distress (risk ratio (RR) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 2.63). In keeping with the more frequent monitoring, mean gestational age at birth was four days less for the twice-weekly surveillance group compared with the fortnightly surveillance group (mean difference (MD) -4.00; 95% CI -7.79 to -0.21). Women in the twice-weekly surveillance group were 25% more likely to have induction of labour than those in the fortnightly surveillance group (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.50).Authors' conclusions There is limited evidence from randomised controlled trials to inform best practice for fetal surveillance regimens when caring for women with pregnancies affected by impaired fetal growth. More studies are needed to evaluate the effects of currently used fetal surveillance regimens in impaired fetal growth.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd007113.pub3

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [1]1. to studies excluded from Sood 2007 {published data only} Sood AK. Vibroacoustic stimulation and modified fetal biophysical profile in high risk pregnancy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of India 2007;57(1):27-36.
  2. [10]10. Baschat AA. Fetal growth disorders. High Risk Pregnancy Management Options. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2006.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grivell, R. M., Wong, L., & Bhatia, V.
Affiliations
Women's and Children's Hospital (AU)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-06-13
Volume
2012
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W4210652690
Cited by
40
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (10/4001/02, SRP/10/4001/02)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Preterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Keywords
fetal monitoring, fetal growth restriction, pregnancy monitoring, fetal biometry

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