Prenatal ultrasound screening and perinatal outcome

Steven H. Golde; Frederick N. Hegge; Joshua A. Copel; Lawrence D. Platt; Stuart Campbell; James E. Haddow; George J. Knight; Glenn E. Palomaki; Bernard Ewigman; James P. Crane; Fredric Frigoletto

doi:10.1056/NEJM199402243300812

Prenatal ultrasound screening and perinatal outcome

Steven H. Golde, Frederick N. Hegge, Joshua A. Copel, Lawrence D. Platt, Stuart Campbell, James E. Haddow, George J. Knight, Glenn E. Palomaki, Bernard Ewigman, James P. Crane, Fredric Frigoletto

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter › peer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

To the Editor: Ewigman et al. (Sept. 16 issue)¹ attempted to determine the efficacy of ultrasonography in pregnancy, but their methods obscured the issue of routine scanning. Of 55,744 women registering for obstetrical care, the authors excluded 32,317 (58 percent). Another 7897 (14 percent) were lost to follow-up or declined to participate in the study. Thus, of all the women, only 15,530 (28 percent) were actually studied. Of the half assigned to the control group (14 percent of the initial cohort), 45 percent underwent ultrasonography. The authors provided no data to explain why the women in this group underwent scanning.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	570-572
Number of pages	3
Journal	New England Journal of Medicine
Volume	330
Issue number	8
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199402243300812
State	Published - Feb 24 1994

Access to Document

10.1056/NEJM199402243300812

Cite this

@article{21410201ce974a2988c395a9ae8d4ba1,

title = "Prenatal ultrasound screening and perinatal outcome",

abstract = "To the Editor: Ewigman et al. (Sept. 16 issue)1 attempted to determine the efficacy of ultrasonography in pregnancy, but their methods obscured the issue of routine scanning. Of 55,744 women registering for obstetrical care, the authors excluded 32,317 (58 percent). Another 7897 (14 percent) were lost to follow-up or declined to participate in the study. Thus, of all the women, only 15,530 (28 percent) were actually studied. Of the half assigned to the control group (14 percent of the initial cohort), 45 percent underwent ultrasonography. The authors provided no data to explain why the women in this group underwent scanning.",

author = "Golde, {Steven H.} and Hegge, {Frederick N.} and Copel, {Joshua A.} and Platt, {Lawrence D.} and Stuart Campbell and Haddow, {James E.} and Knight, {George J.} and Palomaki, {Glenn E.} and Bernard Ewigman and Crane, {James P.} and Fredric Frigoletto",

year = "1994",

month = feb,

day = "24",

doi = "10.1056/NEJM199402243300812",

language = "English",

volume = "330",

pages = "570--572",

journal = "New England Journal of Medicine",

issn = "0028-4793",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prenatal ultrasound screening and perinatal outcome

AU - Golde, Steven H.

AU - Hegge, Frederick N.

AU - Copel, Joshua A.

AU - Platt, Lawrence D.

AU - Campbell, Stuart

AU - Haddow, James E.

AU - Knight, George J.

AU - Palomaki, Glenn E.

AU - Ewigman, Bernard

AU - Crane, James P.

AU - Frigoletto, Fredric

PY - 1994/2/24

Y1 - 1994/2/24

N2 - To the Editor: Ewigman et al. (Sept. 16 issue)1 attempted to determine the efficacy of ultrasonography in pregnancy, but their methods obscured the issue of routine scanning. Of 55,744 women registering for obstetrical care, the authors excluded 32,317 (58 percent). Another 7897 (14 percent) were lost to follow-up or declined to participate in the study. Thus, of all the women, only 15,530 (28 percent) were actually studied. Of the half assigned to the control group (14 percent of the initial cohort), 45 percent underwent ultrasonography. The authors provided no data to explain why the women in this group underwent scanning.

AB - To the Editor: Ewigman et al. (Sept. 16 issue)1 attempted to determine the efficacy of ultrasonography in pregnancy, but their methods obscured the issue of routine scanning. Of 55,744 women registering for obstetrical care, the authors excluded 32,317 (58 percent). Another 7897 (14 percent) were lost to follow-up or declined to participate in the study. Thus, of all the women, only 15,530 (28 percent) were actually studied. Of the half assigned to the control group (14 percent of the initial cohort), 45 percent underwent ultrasonography. The authors provided no data to explain why the women in this group underwent scanning.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028011012&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1056/NEJM199402243300812

DO - 10.1056/NEJM199402243300812

M3 - Letter

C2 - 8302326

AN - SCOPUS:0028011012

SN - 0028-4793

VL - 330

SP - 570

EP - 572

JO - New England Journal of Medicine

JF - New England Journal of Medicine

IS - 8

ER -

Prenatal ultrasound screening and perinatal outcome

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this