The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four year study of 8849 deliveries.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks' gestation in an unselected population in terms of accuracy of detection of fetal structural abnormality and the effect on obstetric and neonatal care. DESIGN: Prospective study over four years. Scans performed by radiographers with overall supervision by a radiologist. SETTING: Ultrasound department of district general hospital. SUBJECTS: All pregnant women were offered scans; 8523 of 8849 (96%) accepted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Information obtained from hospital records, genetic analysis, and post-mortem findings. RESULTS: 166 fetal anomalies occurred; 140 were detected at 19 weeks (sensitivity 85%; specificity 99.9%). In 27 cases fetuses were shown to have severely crippling or lethal abnormalities; termination of pregnancy was requested in 25. Early diagnosis influenced timing and place of delivery in babies with severe cardiac or gastrointestinal anomalies. CONCLUSION: Scanning at 19 weeks with availability of termination can reduce perinatal morbidity and mortality. Scanning can be performed in a general ultrasound department with adequate counselling facilities and close cooperation between radiographers, midwives, obstetricians, paediatricians, and the radiologist.
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
Copp, A. J., Adzick, N. S., Chitty, L. S., Fletcher, J. M., Holmbeck, G. N., & Shaw, G. M. (2015) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/nrdp.2015.7 · Cited by 649
The performance of routine ultrasonographic screening of pregnancies in the Eurofetus Study
Grandjean, H., Larroque, D., & Levi, S. (1999) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70577-6 · Cited by 542
“forthee....towhom% nosoundisdissonantwhichtellsoflife”% —coleridge
McNay, M., & Fleming, J. E. (1999) · Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology · doi:10.1016/s0301-5629(98)00129-x · Cited by 425
Wiesel, A., Queisser-Luft, A., Clementi, M., Bianca, S., & Stoll, C. (2005) · European Journal of Medical Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ejmg.2005.02.003 · Cited by 288
Use of artificial intelligence in obstetrics: Not quite ready for prime time
Sarno, L., Neola, D., Carbone, L., Saccone, G., Carlea, A., Miceli, M., Iorio, G. G., Mappa, I., Rizzo, G., Girolamo, R. D., et al. (2023) · American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM · doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100792 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Luck, C. A.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1992-06-06
- Volume
- 304
- Issue
- 6840
- Pages
- 1474-1478
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2038178719
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 25.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four year study of 8849 deliveries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.304.6840.1474
- The paper
- Luck, C. A. (1992). Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four year study of 8849 deliveries. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.304.6840.1474
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.