Fetal biometry vs maternal glycaemic values: Neonatal hypoglycaemia
Fetal biometry showed no clear difference in neonatal hypoglycaemia compared with maternal glycaemic values (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Fetal biometry vs maternal glycaemic values Neonatal hypoglycaemia · women with gestational diabetes mellitus and their babies Fetal biometry showed no clear difference in neonatal hypoglycaemia compared with maternal glycaemic values (low certainty). Fetal biometry for guiding the medical management of women with gestational diabetes mellitus for improving… (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.9 [0.57, 1.42] | 3 studies · 524 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fetal biometry for guiding the medical management of women with gestational diabetes mellitus for improving maternal and perinatal health 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.