Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Screening all pregnant women with an ultrasound scan in late pregnancy may be justified for identifying breech presentation, but not for identifying fetal growth problems.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Gordon C S Smith 1,*, Alexandros A Moraitis 1, David Wastlund 2, Jim G Thornton 3, Aris Papageorghiou 4, Julia Sanders 5, Alexander E P Heazell 6, Stephen C Robson 7, Ulla Sovio 1, Peter Brocklehurst 8, Edward C F Wilson 2,9

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
2 The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
3 Division of Child Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
4 Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
5 School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
6 Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
7 Reproductive and Vascular Biology Group, The Medical School, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
8 Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
9 Health Economics Group, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
* Corresponding author Email:

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.


If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document