There is considerable methodological heterogeneity in studies of fetal biometry. Standardisation of methodologies is necessary in order to make correct interpretations and comparisons between different charts. A checklist of recommended methodologies is proposed.

Bookmark

Cite This Study

Ioannou et al. (Mon,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69deaaabafb501b9b65584d2 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03451.x

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

1A Longitudinal Study of Fetal Limb Growth1984 · 22 citations
2Biparietal diameter in the Australian aboriginal fetus.1986 · 12 citations
3How to construct ‘normal ranges’ for fetal variables1998 · 481 citations
4Fetal Biometry1995 · 23 citations
5Longitudinal fetal biometry of normal pregnant Melanesian Papua New Guineans to construct standards of reference for Papua New Guinea.1993 · 8 citations

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

1A Longitudinal Study of Fetal Limb Growth1984 · 22 citations
2Biparietal diameter in the Australian aboriginal fetus.1986 · 12 citations
3How to construct ‘normal ranges’ for fetal variables1998 · 481 citations
4Fetal Biometry1995 · 23 citations
5Longitudinal fetal biometry of normal pregnant Melanesian Papua New Guineans to construct standards of reference for Papua New Guinea.1993 · 8 citations