The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SONAR “CROWN‐RUMP LENGTH” MEASUREMENTS
Abstract
Summary: In a study to evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of the sonar technique of measurement of the in vivo fetal crown‐rump length (Robinson, 1973), a series of in vivo and in vitro experiments was performed in which the random and systematic errors inherent in the technique were assessed. The potential sources of random error were those of operator judgement, movement of the fetus and mother, machine sensitivity settings and measurement from the photograph; while the sources of systematic error were those of oscilloscope scale factor, and velocity calibration inaccuracies, and the effect of beam width. The overall effect of the random errors, that is, the reproducibility of the technique, was assessed in an in vivo blind trial in which three independent measurements were made of the fetus. In a series of 30 experiments the average standard deviation of the three readings was found to be 1.2 mm. Evaluation of the systematic errors by in vivo experimentation, on the other hand, showed that the basic sonar measurements were in error by an overestimate of 1 mm for the beam width effect and 3.7 per cent for the scale factor and velocity calibration errors. A weighted non‐linear regression analysis of 334 measurements was performed in order to obtain a “curve of best fit” for the period covering 6 to 14 weeks of menstrual age. The values obtained were corrected for the systematic errors and compared with widely quoted anatomical figures. In the second part of this investigation the original data was further analyzed to determine on a statistical basis the accuracy of the technique as a method of estimating maturity. It was shown that such an estimate could be made to within 4.7 days with a 95 per cent probability on the basis of a single measurement, and to within 2.7 days if three independent measurements were made.
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
Cites
Robinson, H. P. (1973) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.4.5883.28 · Cited by 392
Self-citation
Cited by
Aspirin versus Placebo in Pregnancies at High Risk for Preterm Preeclampsia
Rolnik, D. L., Wright, D., Poon, L. C., O’Gorman, N., Syngelaki, A., de Paco Matallana, C., Akolekar, R., Cicero, S., Janga, D., Singh, M., et al. (2017) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1704559 · Cited by 2,287
Papageorghiou, A. T., Ohuma, E. O., Altman, D. G., Todros, T., Ismail, L. C., Lambert, A., Jaffer, Y. A., Bertino, E., Gravett, M. G., Purwar, M., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61490-2 · Cited by 870
Committee Opinion No. 700: Methods for estimating the due date
(2017) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002046 · Cited by 683
O’Gorman, N., Wright, D., Syngelaki, A., Akolekar, R., Wright, A., Poon, L. C., & Nicolaides, K. H. (2016) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.034 · Cited by 629
ISUOG Practice Guidelines: performance of first‐trimester fetal ultrasound scan
(2013) · Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1002/uog.12342 · Cited by 621
Metadata
- Authors
- Robinson, H. P., & Fleming, J. E. E.
- Venue
- BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1975-09
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 702-710
- ISSN
- 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-0328
- 1471-0528
- OpenAlex
- W2080542014
- Cited by
- 1,413
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- 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: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SONAR “CROWN‐RUMP LENGTH” MEASUREMENTS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1975.tb00710.x
- The paper
- Robinson, H. P., & Fleming, J. E. E. (1975). A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SONAR “CROWN‐RUMP LENGTH” MEASUREMENTS. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1975.tb00710.x
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.