The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fetal bradycardia due to intrathecal opioids for labour analgesia: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Objective To evaluate fetal and maternal adverse effects of intrathecal opioid analgesia during labour. Data sources A systematic search was performed, in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, bibliographies, and personal contact with authors, in any language, up to February 2001. Study selection Full reports on randomised comparisons of any analgesia with intrathecal opioid (experimental group) with any non‐intrathecal opioid regimen (control group) during labour. Data extraction Dichotomous data from 24 trials (3513 women). Results With intrathecal opioids, there was a significant increase in the risk of fetal bradycardia: odds ratio 1.8 (95% confidence interval 1.0 to 3.1), number‐needed‐to‐harm 28. The risk of caesarean section due to fetal heart rate abnormalities was similar (6.0%versus 7.8%). The incidence of pruritus was significantly higher with intrathecal opioids: relative risk 29.6 (95% CI 13.6 to 64.6), number‐needed‐to‐harm 1.7. Conclusions Intrathecal opioids for labour increase the risk of fetal bradycardia and maternal pruritus. The risk of subsequent caesarean section is not increased.
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
Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trials
Yusuf, S., Peto, R., Lewis, J., Collins, R., & Sleight, P. (1985) · Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/s0033-0620(85)80003-7 · Cited by 3,205
The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect
Cook, R. J., & Sackett, D. L. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6977.452 · Cited by 1,885
Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat.
Altman, D. G. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1309 · Cited by 938
Cited by
Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews
Jones, L., Othman, M., Dowswell, T., Alfirevic, Z., Gates, S., Newburn, M., Jordan, S., Lavender, T., & Neilson, J. P. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd009234.pub2 · Cited by 608
The Risk of Cesarean Delivery with Neuraxial Analgesia Given Early versus Late in Labor
Wong, C. A., Scavone, B. M., Peaceman, A. M., McCarthy, R. J., Sullivan, J. T., Diaz, N. T., Yaghmour, E., Marcus, R.-J. L., Sherwani, S. S., Sproviero, M. T., et al. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa042573 · Cited by 440
Timing of caesarean section according to urgency
Leung, T. Y., & Lao, T. T. (2013) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2012.09.005 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Mardirosoff, C., Dumont, L., Boulvain, M., & Tramèr, M. R.
- Venue
- BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-03
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 274-281
- ISSN
- 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-0328
- 1471-0528
- OpenAlex
- W2014539044
- Cited by
- 178
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 1.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Fetal bradycardia due to intrathecal opioids for labour analgesia: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01380.x
- The paper
- Mardirosoff, C., Dumont, L., Boulvain, M., & Tramèr, M. R. (2002). Fetal bradycardia due to intrathecal opioids for labour analgesia: a systematic review. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01380.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.
