Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38355457›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

Large-scale analysis of interobserver agreement and reliability in cardiotocography interpretation during labor using an online tool.

Imane Ben M'Barek, Badr Ben M'Barek, Grégoire Jauvion, Emilia Holmström, Antoine Agman, Jade Merrer, Pierre-François Ceccaldi

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Imane Ben M'BarekService de Gynécologie Obstétrique, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris - Hôpital Beaujon, 100 boulevard du Général Leclerc, Clichy La Garenne, France. imane.benmbarek@aphp.fr.
Badr Ben M'BarekGenos Care, Paris, France.
Grégoire JauvionGenos Care, Paris, France.
Emilia HolmströmService de Gynécologie Obstétrique, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris - Hôpital Beaujon, 100 boulevard du Général Leclerc, Clichy La Garenne, France.
Antoine AgmanService de Gynécologie Obstétrique, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris - Hôpital Beaujon, 100 boulevard du Général Leclerc, Clichy La Garenne, France.
Jade MerrerAP-HP.Nord-Université Paris Cité, Hôpital Universitaire Robert Debré, Unité d'épidémiologie clinique, 1426, InsermParis, CIC, France.
Pierre-François CeccaldiService de Gynécologie-Obstétrique et Médecine de la reproduction, Hôpital Foch, 40 Rue Worth, 92150, Suresnes, France.
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FRHôpital Foch · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile the effectiveness of cardiotocography in reducing neonatal morbidity is still debated, it remains the primary method for assessing fetal well-being during labor. Evaluating how accurately professionals interpret cardiotocography signals is essential for its effective use. The objective was to evaluate the accuracy of fetal hypoxia prediction by practitioners through the interpretation of cardiotocography signals and clinical variables during labor. MATERIAL AND

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional online survey, involving 120 obstetric healthcare providers from several countries. One hundred cases, including fifty cases of fetal hypoxia, were randomly assigned to participants who were invited to predict the fetal outcome (binary criterion of pH with a threshold of 7.15) based on the cardiotocography signals and clinical variables. After describing the participants, we calculated (with a 95% confidence interval) the success rate, sensitivity and specificity to predict the fetal outcome for the whole population and according to pH ranges, professional groups and number of years of experience. Interobserver agreement and reliability were evaluated using the proportion of agreement and Cohen's kappa respectively.

resultsThe overall ability to predict a pH level below 7.15 yielded a success rate of 0.58 (95% CI 0.56-0.60), a sensitivity of 0.58 (95% CI 0.56-0.60) and a specificity of 0.63 (95% CI 0.61-0.65). No significant difference in the success rates was observed with respect to profession and number of years of experience. The success rate was higher for the cases with a pH level below 7.05 (0.69) and above 7.20 (0.66) compared to those falling between 7.05 and 7.20 (0.48). The proportion of agreement between participants was good (0.82), with an overall kappa coefficient indicating substantial reliability (0.63).

conclusionsThe use of an online tool enabled us to collect a large amount of data to analyze how practitioners interpret cardiotocography data during labor. Despite a good level of agreement and reliability among practitioners, the overall accuracy is poor, particularly for cases with a neonatal pH between 7.05 and 7.20. Factors such as profession and experience level do not present notable impact on the accuracy of the annotations. The implementation and use of a computerized cardiotocography analysis software has the potential to enhance the accuracy to detect fetal hypoxia, especially for ambiguous cardiotocography tracings.

Indexed as

CardiotocographyFetal HypoxiaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHeart Rate, FetalHumansInfant, NewbornObserver VariationPregnancyReproducibility of ResultsCardiotocographyFetal heart rateFetal hypoxiaInterobserver agreementIntrapartumLabor

Identifiers

PMID38355457
PMCPMC10865637
OpenAlexW4391815654

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.