Using Z-scores to compare biometry data obtained during prenatal ultrasound screening by midwives and physicians

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 40-42

  Capmas, P ^a   Salomon, L J ^b   Picone, O ^a,c   Fuchs, F ^a   Frydman, R ^a,c   Senat, M V ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^c INSERM   (France)

Author keywords

Biometry; Fetal and placental pathology; Fetal imaging; Fetal ultrasound; Genetic counseling; Midwives; Z scores

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMETRY; BIPARIETAL DISTANCE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMUR; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; FISHER EXACT TEST; GESTATIONAL AGE; HEAD CIRCUMFERENCE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MIDWIFE; PATIENT SELECTION; PHYSICIAN; PREDICTION; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRENATAL SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCORING SYSTEM; SECOND TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; STUDENT T TEST; THIRD TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; Z SCORE;

ADULT; BIOMETRY; FEMALE; FETAL DEVELOPMENT; FETUS; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDWIFERY; PHYSICIANS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, SECOND; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, THIRD; REFERENCE VALUES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 75149137550     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.2417     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Chitty LS, Altman DG, Henderson A, Campbell S. 1994a. Charts of fetal size: 2. Head measurements. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 101(1): 35-43.
2. Chitty LS, Altman DG, Henderson A, Campbell S. 1994b. Charts of fetal size: 4. Femur length. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 101(2): 132-135.
3. Herman A, Maymon R, Dreazen E, Caspi E, Bukovsky I, Weinraub Z. 1998. Nuchal translucency audit: a novel image-scoring method. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 12(6): 398-403.
4. Perni SC, Chervenak FA, Kalish RB, et al. 2004. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of fetal biometry. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 24(6): 654-658.
5. Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Duyme M, Buvat I, Ville Y. 2005a. The impact of choice of reference charts and equations on the assessment of fetal biometry. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 25(6): 559-565.
6. Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Ville Y. 2005b. Analysis of Z-score distribution for the quality control of fetal ultrasound measurements at 20-24 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 26(7): 750-754.
7. Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Ville Y, et al. 2006a. Quality control of prenatal ultrasound. A role for biometry. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 34(9): 683-691.
8. Salomon LJ, Duyme M, Crequat J, et al. 2006b. French fetal biometry: reference equations and comparison with other charts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 28(2): 193-198.
9. Snijders RJ, Nicolaides KH. 1994. Fetal biometry at 14-40 weeks' gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 4(1): 34-48.