A simple estimated fetal weight equation for fetuses between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation

Honarvar, M; Allahyari, Mahboobeh; Dehbashi, Sanaz

doi:10.1016/s0020-7292(99)00117-4

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact that males have about 3% more birth weight at term than females [29] was discussed together with the question of the accuracy of fetal weight estimation in only two further studies: Mills et al [30] , investigating preterm pregnancies (weeks [23][24][25][26][27][28][29], had the same result as we state here, and Honarvar et al [31] reported a similar result investigating preterm pregnancies between weeks 24 and 34. There was no statistically significant difference of the birth weight between males and females though females had about 46 g more average birth weight.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Ultrasonic Fetal Weight Estimation

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of our study was the evaluation of sonographic fetal weight estimation taking into consideration 9 of the most important factors of influence on the precision of the estimation. Methods: We analyzed 820 singleton pregnancies from 22 to 42 weeks of gestational age. We evaluated 9 different factors that potentially influence the precision of sonographic weight estimation (time interval between estimation and delivery, experts vs. less experienced investigator, fetal gender, gestational age, fetal weight, maternal BMI, amniotic fluid index, presentation of the fetus, location of the placenta). Finally, we compared the results of the fetal weight estimation of the fetuses with poor scanning conditions to those presenting good scanning conditions. Results: Of the 9 evaluated factors that may influence accuracy of fetal weight estimation, only a short interval between sonographic weight estimation and delivery (0–7 vs. 8–14 days) had a statistically significant impact. Conclusion: Of all known factors of influence, only a time interval of more than 7 days between estimation and delivery had a negative impact on the estimation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Ultrasonic Fetal Weight Estimation

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From 2004, gestational age has been routinely measured by a first trimester ultrasound scan. Records with missing information on gestational age and birthweight <1200 g ( n = 58) were included in the cohort by the calculated gestational age, assuming that the recorded birthweight was an average value . The interval between registered pregnancies was examined to ensure that double registration was not counted as recurrence.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recurrence of second trimester miscarriage and extreme preterm delivery at 16–27 weeks of gestation with a focus on cervical insufficiency and prophylactic cerclage

Sneider

Christiansen

Sundtoft

et al. 2016

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Records with unregistered gestational age and birth weight <1,200 g (n=58) were included in the cohort by the calculated gestational age. 22 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of second trimester miscarriages and spontaneous deliveries

Sneider¹,

Langhoff‐Roos²,

Sundtoft³

et al. 2015

CLEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo validate the diagnosis of second trimester miscarriages/deliveries (16+0 weeks to 27+6 weeks of gestation) recorded as miscarriages in the Danish National Patient Registry or spontaneous deliveries in the Danish Medical Birth Registry, and asses the validity of risk factors, pregnancy complications, and cerclage by review of medical records.Materials and methodsIn a cohort of 2,358 women with a second trimester miscarriage/delivery in first pregnancy and a subsequent delivery during 1997–2012, we reviewed a representative sample of 682 medical records. We searched for clinically important information and calculated positive predictive values of the registry diagnoses stratified by type of registry, as well as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and kappa coefficients of risk factors, pregnancy complications, and cerclage.ResultsMiscarriage/spontaneous delivery in the second trimester was confirmed in 621/682 patients (91.1%). Pregnancy complications in second trimester miscarriages were underreported, resulting in low sensitivities and poor to moderate agreements between records and registries. There was a good agreement (kappa >0.6) between medical records and the registries regarding risk factors and cerclage. The diagnosis of cervical insufficiency had “moderate” kappa values for both miscarriages and deliveries (0.55 and 0.57).ConclusionSpontaneous second trimester deliveries and miscarriages recorded in the registers were confirmed by medical records in 91%, but register-based information on pregnancy complications need to be improved. We recommend that all pregnancies ending spontaneously beyond the first trimester are included in the national birth registry and described by appropriate variables.

show abstract

A simple estimated fetal weight equation for fetuses between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Ultrasonic Fetal Weight Estimation

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Ultrasonic Fetal Weight Estimation

Recurrence of second trimester miscarriage and extreme preterm delivery at 16–27 weeks of gestation with a focus on cervical insufficiency and prophylactic cerclage

Validation of second trimester miscarriages and spontaneous deliveries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About