Electronic fetal monitoring. Is not necessary for ...[BMJ. 2001] - PubMed Result

SearchDatabase nameforSearch term

Advanced Search

Your browser version may not work well with NCBI's Web applications. More information here...

Display Show

All: 1

Review: 0

Click to change filter selection through MyNCBI.

1: BMJ. 2001 Jun 16;322(7300):1436-7. Links

Comment in:: BMJ. 2002 Feb 23;324(7335):483-5.
Comment on:: BMJ. 2001 Jun 16;322(7300):1457-60; discussion 1460-2.

Electronic fetal monitoring. Is not necessary for low risk labours.

PMID: 11408285 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

PMCID: PMC1120506

Related articles

The use of intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring: a national survey.
Ir Med J. 2007 Feb; 100(2):360-2.

[Ir Med J. 2007]
ReviewFetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003; (2):CD000116.

[Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003]
Randomised controlled trial of cardiotocography versus Doppler auscultation of fetal heart at admission in labour in low risk obstetric population.
BMJ. 2001 Jun 16; 322(7300):1457-60; discussion 1460-2.

[BMJ. 2001]
Practices and views on fetal heart monitoring: a structured observation and interview study.
BJOG. 2006 Apr; 113(4):409-18.

[BJOG. 2006]
ReviewContinuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19; 3:CD006066. Epub 2006 Jul 19.

[Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006]
» See reviews... | » See all...

Cited by 1 PubMed Central article

Cardiotocography v Doppler auscultation. Guidelines highlight gaps in research evidence.
Thomas J, Paranjothy S, Kelly T, Kavanagh J. BMJ. 2002 Feb 23; 324(7335):482-5.

[BMJ. 2002]

Recent Activity

Clear Turn Off Turn On

Electronic fetal monitoring. Is not necessary for low risk labours.Electronic fetal monitoring. Is not necessary for low risk labours.

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Display Show