Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

7 questions · 7 findings · 1 reviews · Pregnancy and Childbirth

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 3 · 42.9%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 14.3%Low 3 · 42.9%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Perinatal mortality · Pregnant women with/without complications

Traditional antenatal CTG showed no clear difference in perinatal mortality compared with no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.05 [0.95, 4.42]
4 studies · 1627 participants
Low

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Caesarean section · Pregnant women with/without complications

Traditional antenatal CTG showed no clear difference in caesarean section compared with no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.06 [0.88, 1.28]
3 studies · 1279 participants
Low

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes · Pregnant women with/without complications

It is very uncertain whether traditional antenatal CTG changes apgar less than 7 at 5 minutes compared with no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.83 [0.37, 1.88]
1 study · 396 participants
Very low

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Admission to neonatal special care unit or intensive care unit · Pregnant women with/without complications

Traditional antenatal CTG showed no clear difference in admission to neonatal special care unit or intensive care unit compared with no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.08 [0.84, 1.39]
2 studies · 883 participants
Low

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Neurodevelopmental disability · Pregnant women with/without complications

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Caesarean section for non‐reassuring or abnormal fetal heart rate patterns · Pregnant women with/without complications

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Traditional antenatal CTG vs no antenatal CTG (women at increased risk of complication)

Women's satisfaction with care · Pregnant women with/without complications

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found