Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/62419
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTheera Tongsongen_US
dc.contributor.authorArunsri Iamthonginen_US
dc.contributor.authorChanane Wanapiraken_US
dc.contributor.authorWirawit Piyamongkolen_US
dc.contributor.authorSupatra Sirichotiyakulen_US
dc.contributor.authorPongrak Boonyanuraken_US
dc.contributor.authorTeerapong Tatiyapornkulen_US
dc.contributor.authorChanthawat Neelasrien_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-11T09:27:05Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-11T09:27:05Z-
dc.date.issued2005-02-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn13418076en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-14944343728en_US
dc.identifier.other10.1111/j.1447-0756.2005.00243.xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=14944343728&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/62419-
dc.description.abstractAim: To evaluate the accuracy of fetal heart rate variability interpretation by obstetricians using the criteria of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), compared with computer-aided analysis as a gold standard. Methods: One hundred and fourteen panels of fetal heart-rate tracings derived from electrocardiogram via scalp electrodes obtained from women with high-risk pregnancies during the intrapartum period. The tracings were interpreted using computer analysis and recorded as a gold standard. The same tracings were distributed to six observers: three residents in the third year of training and three faculty members. All observers blindly interpreted the fetal heart-rate variability without the knowledge of the computer analysis. The main outcome measures were; (i) the accuracy of fetal heart-rate variability interpretation by obstetricians using the NICHD criteria compared with computer-aided analysis was presented as a percentage value; and (ii) the agreement of fetal heart-rate variability interpretation between the obstetricians and the computer analysis using the NICHD criteria was presented as a κ-value. Result: When using the computer analysis as a gold standard, the accuracy of fetal heart-rate variability interpretation in the residents group was 81.58%, 86,84% and 82.46%, respectively, with a mean of 83.62%, whereas the accuracy of the faculty members was 79.82%, 67.54% and 79.82%, respectively, with a mean of 75.73%. κ-values, representing the agreement of interpretation, were 0.70, 0.78 and 0.72, with a mean of 0.73 ±0.04 among the residents, and 0.67, 0.50 and 0.68, with a mean of 0.62 ± 0.10 among the faculty members. Agreements in the two groups were not significantly different (Student's t-test, P = 0.14). Conclusion: Using the NICHD criteria, the accuracy and agreement of fetal heart-rate variability interpretation in the third-year residents and faculty members are substantial. There was no difference between the groups with regard to the agreement of fetal heart-rate variability interpretation.en_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleAccuracy of fetal heart-rate variability interpretation by obstetricians using the criteria of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development compared with computer-aided interpretationen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Researchen_US
article.volume31en_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.