Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2376451377> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 70 of
70
with 100 items per page.
- W2376451377 endingPage "106S" @default.
- W2376451377 startingPage "106S" @default.
- W2376451377 abstract "INTRODUCTION: We sought to investigate whether the interpretation of intrapartum fetal heart rate tracings (FHT) during labor differed between paper and computer screen tracings. METHODS: Descriptive study where physicians independently reviewed a random selection of 88 FHT of laboring patients during 2014 and 2015. FHT were classified as category I (N=46), II (N=40) or III (N=2) by 2 independent maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialists not participating in the study. Participants were asked to: (i) interpret FHT on paper and screen format, (ii) classify FHT by category and (iii) propose management plans. Weighted kappa coefficients were used to analyze intraobserver and interobserver variability; coefficients greater than 0.75 were considered excellent while 0.40–0.75 were considered fair-to-good. Wilcoxon test was used where appropriate. RESULTS: 7 residents, 2 obstetricians and 2 MFM attendings reviewed 88 FHT (total 734 tracings available). Intraobserver kappa correlation varied from 0.43 to −0.80 (1/11 reviewer reached excellent correlation). Interobserver correlation was 0.63 (fair to good correlation). Category II interpretation was better with paper (72%) than screen tracing (65%) (P=.03). Category III FHT interpretation was better for screen (60%) than paper (28%) (P=.001). There was no significant difference in interobserver and intraobserver variability when stratified by level of physician training. Proposed plans of care differed significantly among reviewers according to FHT interpretation. CONCLUSION: There is great variety of intraobserver and interobserver FHT interpretation which impacts the management of women in labor. When an intervention in labor is decided, we suggest analyzing both paper and screen FHT. Training workshops are required to uniform interpretation criteria." @default.
- W2376451377 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2376451377 creator A5009333350 @default.
- W2376451377 creator A5024823265 @default.
- W2376451377 creator A5075056066 @default.
- W2376451377 creator A5081145437 @default.
- W2376451377 date "2016-05-01" @default.
- W2376451377 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
- W2376451377 title "Differences in Interpretation and Management of Computer Screen Versus Paper Fetal Heart Tracings [2M]" @default.
- W2376451377 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000483441.99811.ae" @default.
- W2376451377 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
- W2376451377 type Work @default.
- W2376451377 sameAs 2376451377 @default.
- W2376451377 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W2376451377 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2376451377 hasAuthorship W2376451377A5009333350 @default.
- W2376451377 hasAuthorship W2376451377A5024823265 @default.
- W2376451377 hasAuthorship W2376451377A5075056066 @default.
- W2376451377 hasAuthorship W2376451377A5081145437 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C117220453 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C12868164 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C206041023 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C2777953023 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C2778724333 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C3020626262 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C527412718 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConcept C84393581 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C117220453 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C126322002 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C126838900 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C12868164 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C138885662 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C206041023 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C2524010 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C2777953023 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C2778724333 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C3020626262 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C33923547 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C41895202 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C527412718 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C71924100 @default.
- W2376451377 hasConceptScore W2376451377C84393581 @default.
- W2376451377 hasIssue "Supplement 1" @default.
- W2376451377 hasLocation W23764513771 @default.
- W2376451377 hasOpenAccess W2376451377 @default.
- W2376451377 hasPrimaryLocation W23764513771 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2008191359 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2037432489 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2078750740 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2085137331 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2252916976 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2584303248 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W2945134834 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W3013363301 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W3116325616 @default.
- W2376451377 hasRelatedWork W4308654808 @default.
- W2376451377 hasVolume "127" @default.
- W2376451377 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2376451377 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2376451377 magId "2376451377" @default.
- W2376451377 workType "article" @default.