Study	Reason for exclusion
Ellwood 1997	Trial studied uterine Doppler ultrasound and not fetal and umbilical
Goffinet 2001	Trial studied uterine Doppler ultrasound and not fetal and umbilical
Gonsoulin 1991	Conference abstract - not clear whether high-risk/low-risk/unselected pregnancies, and no data suitable for inclusion. Further details were sought from the authors by the authors of the previous version of this review (L Bricker and JP Neilson), without success.
Schneider 1992	Conference abstract in English language identified - unexplained difference in numbers (250 vs 329) in Doppler vs control groups suggesting allocation bias. The definitive publication after translation from German did not explain this difference and failed to outline the trial methodology
Scholler 1993	This study was translated from German for us. It was a quasi RCT of 211 women undergoing Doppler ultrasound vs no Doppler ultrasound. It was excluded for a combination of the following reasons: the only outcome relevant to our review was induction of labour; the study had high risk of bias being a quasi RCT; further information was needed from the authors before these data could be included. Data reported for induction of labour: Doppler group 37/108 and no Doppler group 41/103
Snaith 2006	Trial studied uterine Doppler ultrasound and not fetal and umbilical
Subtil 2000	Trial studied uterine Doppler ultrasound and not fetal and umbilical
Subtil 2003	Trial studied uterine Doppler ultrasound and not fetal and umbilical

RCT: randomised controlled trial

vs: versus