Clinical Foetal Weight Prediction

Loeffler, F. E.

doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1967.tb03779.x

Cited by 58 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides bodily integrity, biometry serves to estimate foetal weight and thus the age-appropriate development. While the first formulae for weight estimation were based solely on measurement of the biparietal diameter (BPD), the further development of numerous formulae based on combinations of biometric markers then led to an advantage over clinical estimation methods such as inspection and palpation [1][2][3][4][5]. For the great majority of weight estimation formulae it holds that they have been developed by means of regression analyses based on relatively small collectives of average term infants.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Errors of 35 Weight Estimation Formulae in a Standard Collective

Hoopmann

Kagan

Sauter

et al. 2016

Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The estimation of foetal weight is an integral part of prenatal care and obstetric routine. In spite of its known susceptibility to errors in cases of underweight or overweight babies, important obstetric decisions depend on it. In the present contribution we have examined the accuracy and error distribution of 35 weight estimation formulae within the normal weight range of 2500-4000 g. The aim of the study was to identify the weight estimation formulae with the best possible correspondence to the requirements of clinical routine. Materials and Methods: 35 clinically established weight estimation formulae were analysed in 3416 foetuses with weights between 2500 and 4000 g. For this we determined and compared the mean percentage error (MPE), the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and the proportions of estimates within the error ranges of 5, 10, 20 and 30%. In addition, separate regression lines were calculated for the relationship between estimated and actual birth weights for the weight range 2500-4000 g. The formulae were thus examined for possible inhomogeneities. Results: The lowest MPE were achieved with the Hadlock III and V formulae (0.8%, STW 9.2 % or, respectively, −0.8 %, STW 10.0 %). The lowest absolute error (6.6 %) as well as the most favourable frequency distribution in cases below 5 % and 10 % error (43.9 and 77.5) were seen for the Halaska formula. In graphic representations of the regression lines, 16 formulae revealed a weight overestimation in the lower weight range and an underestimation in the upper range. 14 formulae gave underestimations and merely 5 gave overestimations over the entire tested weight range. Conclusion: The majority of the tested formulae gave underestimations of the actual birth weight over the entire weight range or at least in the upper weight range. This result supports the cur-

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Errors of 35 Weight Estimation Formulae in a Standard Collective

Hoopmann

Kagan

Sauter

et al. 2016

Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La prédiction par la mesure de la hauteur utérine ou par la palpation de l'utérus (manoeuvres de Léopold) [11] permet de sélectionner un sous-groupe à risque, au sein duquel on pourra confirmer le poids élevé pour l'âge gestationnel par l'échographie.…”

Section: Prédiction Du Poids De Naissance : Verre à Moitié Plein Ou àunclassified

Faut-il ou non déclencher les macrosomes ? Nous ne sommes pas convaincus d'être pour, donc nous randomisons

Boulvain

Epiney

Morales

2006

Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One Grim Spectre Acute dilatation of the stomach is rarely seen today, but early recognition of the condition is important, because untreated it may prove rapidly fatal.' 2 Once acute dilation becomes established enormous quantities of fluid accumulate within the stomach. Uncorrected, this rapid flux of body fluids leads to peripheral circulatory failure.…”

Section: Reaching the Topmentioning

confidence: 99%

One grim spectre.

1970

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical Foetal Weight Prediction

Cited by 58 publications

References 1 publication

Comparison of Errors of 35 Weight Estimation Formulae in a Standard Collective

Comparison of Errors of 35 Weight Estimation Formulae in a Standard Collective

Faut-il ou non déclencher les macrosomes ? Nous ne sommes pas convaincus d'être pour, donc nous randomisons

One grim spectre.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About