Question · asked by 1 review
Intermittent ausculation of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well‐being ‐ Intensive Pinard vs routine Pinard (outcomes: Epidural anaesthesia for pain relief excluding for caesarean section
- Population
- women in established labour and their babies.
- Intervention
- Intermittent ausculation of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well‐being ‐ Intensive Pinard
- Comparison
- routine Pinard (outcomes
- Outcome
- Epidural anaesthesia for pain relief excluding for caesarean section
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Intermittent ausculation of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well‐being ‐ Intensive Pinard vs routine Pinard (outcomes Epidural anaesthesia for pain relief excluding caesarean section · women in established labour and their babies. Intermittent auscultation (IA) of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well‐being (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intermittent auscultation (IA) of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well‐being 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
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.