CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Ultrasound in Clinical ApplicationsPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The diagnostic impact of limited, screening obstetric ultrasound when performed by midwives in rural Uganda

Swanson, J O, Kawooya, M G, Swanson, D L, Hippe, D S, Dungu-Matovu, P, Nathan, R·2014·Journal of Perinatology
DOI 10.1038/jp.2014.54
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the diagnostic impact of limited obstetric ultrasound (US) in identifying high-risk pregnancies when used as a screening tool by midwives in rural Uganda.Study design This was an institutional review board-approved prospective study of expecting mothers in rural Uganda who underwent clinical and US exams as part of their standard antenatal care visit in a local health center in the Isingiro district of Uganda. The midwives documented clinical impressions before performing a limited obstetric US on the same patient. The clinical findings were then compared with the subsequent US findings to determine the diagnostic impact. The midwives were US-naive before participating in the 6-week training course for limited obstetric US.Result Midwife-performed screening obstetric US altered the clinical diagnosis in up to 12% clinical encounters. This diagnostic impact is less (6.7 to 7.4%) if the early third trimester diagnosis of malpresentation is excluded. The quality assurance review of midwives' imaging demonstrated 100% sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosing gestational number, and 90% sensitivity and 96% specificity in the diagnosis of fetal presentation.Conclusion Limited, screening obstetric US performed by midwives with focused, obstetric US training demonstrates the diagnostic impact for identifying conditions associated with high-risk pregnancies in 6.7 to 12% of patients screened. The limited obstetric US improved diagnosis of early pregnancy complication as well as later gestation twins and malpresentation. Midwives who have undergone focused 6-week limited obstetric US training proved capable of diagnosing twins and fetal presentation with high sensitivity and specificity.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/jp.2014.54

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Ultrasound training programs have taught non-experts either to independently perform obstetric ultrasounds to screen for high-risk pregnancies or to utilize tele-ultrasound.

    “In an attempt to overcome such challenges, ultrasound training programs have taught non-experts either to independently perform obstetric ultrasounds to screen for high-risk pregnancies (52–55) or to utilize tele-ultrasound (29, 34, 37, 38).”

    From Tele-Ultrasound in Resource-Limited Settings: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [52]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Swanson, J. O., Kawooya, M. G., Swanson, D. L., Hippe, D. S., Dungu-Matovu, P., & Nathan, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Mengo Hospital (UG)
Corresponding author
Swanson, J O
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Perinatology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2014-04-03
Volume
34
Issue
7
Pages
508-512
ISSN
  • 0743-8346 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5543
DOI
10.1038/jp.2014.54
OpenAlex
W1965471706
Cited by
80
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Perinatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Washington
  • Seattle Foundation
  • GE Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Ultrasound in Clinical Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Keywords
prenatal screening, high-risk pregnancy, fetal malpresentation, gestational age estimation, prenatal care, rural Uganda, midwifery education, diagnostic accuracy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Midwifery, Obstetrics, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Prospective Studies, Rural Population, Sensitivity and Specificity, Uganda, Ultrasonography, Prenatal, Pregnancy, High-Risk, Young Adult

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