Randomized clinical trials are not always the best way to assess diagnostic tests: the case of fetal fibronectin testing

G. J. van Baaren; M. M.C. Bruijn; B. W. Mol

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.037

Randomized clinical trials are not always the best way to assess diagnostic tests: the case of fetal fibronectin testing

G. J. van Baaren^* (Corresponding Author), M. M.C. Bruijn, B. W. Mol

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recently, Berghella and Saccone1 published in this journal a meta-analysis on fetal fibronectin as predictor of preterm birth. In this meta-analysis, the authors concluded that women assigned randomly to the knowledge of fibronectin results did not have reduced preterm birth rates compared to a control group

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	142-143
Number of pages	2
Journal	American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume	218
Issue number	1
Early online date	2 Jan 2018
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.037
Publication status	Published - Jan 2018

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.037Licence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{654edd1a59de46dc87a24d18ebcdd676,

title = "Randomized clinical trials are not always the best way to assess diagnostic tests: the case of fetal fibronectin testing",

abstract = "Recently, Berghella and Saccone1 published in this journal a meta-analysis on fetal fibronectin as predictor of preterm birth. In this meta-analysis, the authors concluded that women assigned randomly to the knowledge of fibronectin results did not have reduced preterm birth rates compared to a control group",

author = "{van Baaren}, {G. J.} and Bruijn, {M. M.C.} and Mol, {B. W.}",

year = "2018",

month = jan,

doi = "10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.037",

language = "English",

volume = "218",

pages = "142--143",

journal = "American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology",

issn = "0002-9378",

publisher = "Mosby/Elsevier,",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomized clinical trials are not always the best way to assess diagnostic tests

T2 - the case of fetal fibronectin testing

AU - van Baaren, G. J.

AU - Bruijn, M. M.C.

AU - Mol, B. W.

PY - 2018/1

Y1 - 2018/1

N2 - Recently, Berghella and Saccone1 published in this journal a meta-analysis on fetal fibronectin as predictor of preterm birth. In this meta-analysis, the authors concluded that women assigned randomly to the knowledge of fibronectin results did not have reduced preterm birth rates compared to a control group

AB - Recently, Berghella and Saccone1 published in this journal a meta-analysis on fetal fibronectin as predictor of preterm birth. In this meta-analysis, the authors concluded that women assigned randomly to the knowledge of fibronectin results did not have reduced preterm birth rates compared to a control group

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85039436655&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.037

DO - 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.037

M3 - Letter

C2 - 29305007

AN - SCOPUS:85039436655

SN - 0002-9378

VL - 218

SP - 142

EP - 143

JO - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

IS - 1

ER -

Randomized clinical trials are not always the best way to assess diagnostic tests: the case of fetal fibronectin testing

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this