Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The study assessed the agreement in cardiotocogram interpretation between the 2CTG computerized system and experienced and inexperienced observers involved in a telecardiotocography project called 'TOCOMAT'. Both observers and computer analyzed FHR baseline, FHR variability, and number of large accelerations and of decelerations. The k coefficient was calculated for the statistical analysis. The interobserver agreement about the evaluation of the FHR baseline and of the large accelerations was good; it was poor about the assessment of the FHR variability and the decelerations. Similar results were obtained for the agreement among observers and computer. The use of a computerized system provides exact values for most CTG parameters; the experts, however, should rely both on clinical features and on the computerized interpretation, to make decisions about management.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000068955 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!