2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2004.02.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing fetal health

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Over the last 50 years, there have been considerable advances in the technology and more than 50 different formulae have been devised to measure fetal growth. Disappointingly, there is no evidence that current methods of ultrasound assessment of fetal growth make any difference to outcome in both low-risk and high-risk pregnancies (Gribben and James 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the last 50 years, there have been considerable advances in the technology and more than 50 different formulae have been devised to measure fetal growth. Disappointingly, there is no evidence that current methods of ultrasound assessment of fetal growth make any difference to outcome in both low-risk and high-risk pregnancies (Gribben and James 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fetal brain damage can manifest on US as fetal hypoxia with US criteria consisting of intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR), abnormal Doppler (especially umbilical), abnormal score on biophysical profile, which depends upon fetal heart rate, amniotic fluid volume, fetal breathing movements, gross body movements, and fetal tone [11]. Factors leading to pregnancies at risk for fetal brain damage are numerous and include maternal, obstetrical (mechanic), and fetal factors.…”
Section: Risk Factors For Fetal Brain Injurymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Today, it is generally accepted that current methods for biophysical antenatal surveillance do not facilitate a comprehensive and reliable assessment of foetal well-being (Gribbin and James 2004, Guimaraes-Filho et al 2008, Lewis 2003. Alternatively, there is continuing development of existing technologies and research into new non-invasive methods that aim to improve antenatal monitoring procedures (Comani et al 2005, Kovacs et al 2000, Pieri et al 2001, Rolfe et al 2006, Várady et al 2003.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%