U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Smith GCS, Moraitis AA, Wastlund D, et al. Universal late pregnancy ultrasound screening to predict adverse outcomes in nulliparous women: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2021 Feb. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 25.15.)

Cover of Universal late pregnancy ultrasound screening to predict adverse outcomes in nulliparous women: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

Universal late pregnancy ultrasound screening to predict adverse outcomes in nulliparous women: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Show details

Appendix 5Supporting data for the systematic review of the diagnostic effectiveness of universal ultrasonic screening using macrosomia in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome

MEDLINE and EMBASE

Date range searched: inception to 22 October 2018.

Search strategy

  1. exp fetus echography/
  2. ultrasonography, prenatal.mp.
  3. exp ultrasound/
  4. ultraso*.mp.
  5. sonograph*.mp.
  6. exp biometry/
  7. USS.mp.
  8. estimated fetal weight.mp.
  9. EFW.mp.
  10. abdominal circumference.mp.
  11. AC.mp.
  12. exp macrosomia/
  13. macrosomi*.mp.
  14. exp fetus weight/
  15. fetal weight.mp.
  16. exp birth weight/
  17. birthweight.mp.
  18. large for gestational age.mp.
  19. LGA.mp.
  20. large fetus.mp.
  21. exp brachial plexus injury/or brachial plexus injury.mp.
  22. exp shoulder dystocia/or shoulder dystocia.mp.
  23. 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 or 11
  24. 12 or 13 or 14 or 15 or 16 or 17 or 18 or 19 or 20 or 21 or 22
  25. 23 and 24
  26. exp pregnancy/
  27. 25 and 26.
FIGURE 39. The PRISMA flow diagram for the systematic review of macrosomia.

FIGURE 39

The PRISMA flow diagram for the systematic review of macrosomia.

FIGURE 40. Risk-of-bias applicability concerns for included studies for systematic review of macrosomia.

FIGURE 40

Risk-of-bias applicability concerns for included studies for systematic review of macrosomia.

TABLE 24

TABLE 24

Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis of macrosomia

FIGURE 41. Deeks’ funnel plot for publication bias for the prediction of LGA (birthweight > 4000 g or > 90th centile).

FIGURE 41

Deeks’ funnel plot for publication bias for the prediction of LGA (birthweight > 4000 g or > 90th centile). Deeks’ funnel plot asymmetry test: p = 0.02. ESS, effective sample size. (more...)

Copyright © 2021 Smith et al. This work was produced by Smith et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaption in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. For attribution the title, original author(s), the publication source – NIHR Journals Library, and the DOI of the publication must be cited.
Bookshelf ID: NBK568297
Contents

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (4.2M)

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity

ClearTurn OffTurn On

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...