Methods | Randomised. | |
Participants | 2289 women referred for Dopplers studies and for antenatal fetal monitoring | |
Interventions | Continuous wave Doppler studies of umbilical artery. | |
Outcomes | “Fetal outcome: perinatal mortality, Apgar score and admission to the neonatal unit. Obstetric intervention: admission to hospital, induction of labour and caesarean section. Use of tests of fetal well being: cardiotocography, biophysical profile and ultrasound biometry.” | |
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors’ judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not described. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not described. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes |
High risk | Not blinded. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes |
High risk | Not blinded. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes |
Low risk | Data appears to have been analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. It states that 24 women randomised to Doppler didn’t have it carried out and 3 randomised to no Doppler, actually had Dopoler. Data on outcomes in table 3 suggest analysis was based on randomised groups Loss to follow-up - one patient appears to be missing from non Doppler group - table 4 - so minimal loss |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All outcomes specified within the abstract are reported upon in the paper |
Other bias | Low risk | Baseline characteristics similar. “The treatment and control groups were comparable in age, parity, gestation at point of entry and risk features.” |