Development of birthweight and length for gestational age and sex references in Yucatan, Mexico

Abstract

Objective To develop sex‐ and gestational age specific reference percentiles and curves for birth weight and length for Yucatec neonates using data from birth registers of infants born during 2015–2019. Material and methods Observational, descriptive, epidemiologic study in a 5‐year period including every registered birth in the state of Yucatan, Mexico using birth registries. A total of 158 432 live, physically healthy singletons (76 442 females and 81 990 males) between 25 and 42 weeks of gestation were included in the analysis. We used the LMS method to construct smoothed reference centiles (3rd, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 95th, and 97th) and curves for males and females separately. Results Mean maternal age was 26 (SD = 6.22) years. Fifty‐two percent of births occurred by vaginal delivery, 37% were firstborn and similar proportions were second (33%) and third or more (30%) born. 5.5% of newborns included in the references corresponds to neonates born before 37 weeks of gestation (5.9% boys and 5.1% girls). In both sexes, the percentage of infants with a birthweight less than 2500 g was 6.7%. The birthweight at the 50th percentile for males and females at 40 weeks of gestation in this cohort was 3256 and 3167 g, respectively, and the corresponding values for birth length were 50.23 and 49.84 cm (mean differences between sexes: 89 g and 0.40 cm, respectively). Conclusion The reference percentile and curves developed in this study are useful for research purposes and can help health practitioners to assess the biological status of infants born in Yucatán.

Comparative Assessment of Basic Anthropometric Features in Normal and Low Birth Weight Newborns (preliminary results)

“…Most of the studies in the specialized literature do not establish similar advantage of the female sex in LBW infants [1,4], which could be due to the use of different classification of neonates at birth -on gestational age or on birth weight. Both are considered to be helpful for counseling, clinical management and research [9], but the use of different classification makes the comparison between studies difficult and even impossible giving not accurate, biased results.…”