Abstract
The generation of a pathology test result must be based on criteria that are proven to be acceptably reproducible and clinically relevant to be evidence-based. This review de-constructs the umbilical cord coiling index to illustrate how it can stray from being evidence-based.
Publications related to umbilical cord coiling were retrieved and analysed with regard to how the umbilical coiling index was calculated, abnormal coiling was defined and reference ranges were constructed.
Errors and other influences that can occur with the measurement of the length of the umbilical cord or of the number of coils can compromise the generation of the coiling index. Definitions of abnormal coiling are not consistent in the literature. Reference ranges defining hypocoiling or hypercoiling have not taken those potential errors or the possible effect of gestational age into account.
Even the way numerical test results in anatomical pathology are generated, as illustrated by the umbilical coiling index, warrants a critical analysis into its evidence base to ensure that they are reproducible or free from errors.