Terminsbestemmelse: Ultralyd er ikke påvist at være mere præcis end kalendermetoden

Translated title of the contribution: Routine ultrasound dating has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method
  • Ole Olsen
  • , Jette Aaroe Clausen

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    Abstract

    It has been claimed that the expected day of delivery (EDD) determined on the basis of an ultrasound scan is more accurate than using a calendar method. The aim of this paper is to assess the evidence in support of this claim. A critical review of the methodologically best research revealed that among women with regular cycles and know first day of the last menstrual period, Naegele's rule predicted the EDD to be 3.3 days too early, on average, whereas prediction based on ultrasound scans was 2.0 days too late. The standard deviations of the two distributions were the same. After correction for the systematic biases, the two methods of prediction were thus equally precise. It is concluded that the EDD should be calculated by adding 283 days to the date of the last period rather than by adding 280 days. For women with regular cycles and known first day of the last menstrual period, ultrasound dating does not lead to a more precise prediction.

    Translated title of the contributionRoutine ultrasound dating has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method
    Original languageDanish
    JournalUgeskrift for Læger
    Volume160
    Issue number14
    Pages (from-to)2088-2090
    Number of pages3
    ISSN0041-5782
    Publication statusPublished - 30 Mar 1998

    Keywords

    • women

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Routine ultrasound dating has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method: Ultralyd er ikke påvist at være mere præcis end kalendermetoden'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this