Prediction of term birth weight in Hispanic women using an equation based on maternal characteristics

Nahum, Gerard G.; Pham, Krystle Q; Stanislaw, Harold

doi:10.1016/s0301-2115(03)00325-7

Cited by 30 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Vários estudos têm apontado que existe uma variabilidade interobservador na medida do PFE e que isso poderia comprometer seriamente o seu desempenho para uso clínico 20,21 -o que não se observou no presente estudo.…”

Section: Correlação Entre Peso Fetal Estimado Por Ultrassonografia E unclassified

Correlação entre peso fetal estimado por ultrassonografia e peso neonatal

Freire¹,

Cecatti²,

Paiva³

2010

Rev. Bras. Ginecol. Obstet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJETIVO: avaliar a correlação entre o peso fetal estimado (PFE) por ultrassonografia e o peso neonatal (PN), bem como a capacidade do PFE predizer as alterações do PN entre gestantes de João Pessoa (PB). MÉTODOS: estudo de validação diagnóstica incluindo 122 gestantes que tiveram o PFE calculado por ultrassonografia até sete dias antes do parto e o PN determinado imediatamente após o nascimento, com balança específica para recém-nascidos. A correlação entre o PFE e o PN foi avaliada pelo coeficiente de correlação de Pearson entre as duas medidas e pela média das diferenças entre elas. O PFE e o PN foram classificados em: pequeno para idade gestacional (PIG), adequado para a idade gestacional (AIG) e grande para a idade gestacional (GIG), de acordo com os percentis 10 e 90 das respectivas curvas de referência. O diagnóstico de desvios do PFE foi validado utilizando a curva de valores de referência de peso neonatal de Alexander como padrão-ouro, estimando-se a sensibilidade, especificidade, valores preditivos positivo e negativo. RESULTADOS: houve uma elevada correlação linear entre o PFE e o PN (R=0,96) e a diferença entre eles variou entre -474 g e +480 g, com média de +3 g. A maioria das máximas variações percentuais da estimativa de peso esteve entre 10 e 15%. O PFE teve sensibilidade de 85,7% e especificidade de 100% para detecção de PIG, e de 100 e 77,2%, respectivamente, para GIG. CONCLUSÕES: o PFE é capaz de predizer adequadamente o PN, e a curva de PFE de referência testada teve bom desempenho no rastreamento dos desvios do crescimento fetal, quando utilizada nessa população.Abstract PURPOSE: to evaluate the correlation between the estimated fetal weight (EFW) by ultrasonography and the neonatal weight (NW), as well as the EFW's capacity to predict changes in NW among pregnant women in João Pessoa, Paraíba, Brazil. METHODS: a diagnostic validation study, including 122 pregnant women who have had the EFW calculated by ultrasonography up to seven days before delivery and the NW established immediately after birth, with a specific newborn's scale. The correlation between EFW and NW measurements was assessed by Pearson's correlation coefficient and by the mean difference between them. EFW and NW were classified as: low for the gestational age (LGA), adequate for the gestational age (AGA) and high for the gestational age (HGA), according to the percentiles 10 and 90 of the respective reference curves. The diagnosis of EFW deviation has been validated using the values of the Alexander's NW reference curve as gold-standard, by estimating the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. RESULTS: there has been a high linear correlation between the EFW and NW (R=0.96), and the difference between them has varied from -474 g to +480 g, with an average of +3 g. Most of the highest percent weight estimate variations were between 10 and 15%. EFW has had 85.7% of sensitivity and 100% of specificity for the detection of LGA, and 100 and 77.2%, respectively, for the detection of HGA. CONCLUSIONS...

show abstract

Section: Correlação Entre Peso Fetal Estimado Por Ultrassonografia E unclassified

Correlação entre peso fetal estimado por ultrassonografia e peso neonatal

Freire¹,

Cecatti²,

Paiva³

2010

Rev. Bras. Ginecol. Obstet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An analysis of 27 standard ultrasonographic algorithms showed that they had mean absolute prediction errors of up to ± 646 g (± 18.8%) 3,4 . Disturbingly, 20 of 27 ultrasonographic algorithms were less accurate in predicting birth weight than was simply guessing the mean, which resulted in fetal-weight estimates that were accurate to within ± 449 g (± 13.6%) 3 . Based on this, we found it difficult to justify the use of ultrasound alone to predict birth weight.…”

Section: Correspondencementioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasound alone is inferior to combination methods for predicting fetal weight

Nahum

Stanislaw

2007

Ultrasound in Obstet & Gyne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Such studies have produced a wealth of evidence of an association between advanced maternal age and increased risks of fetal loss, preterm delivery, and small size for gestational age (Astolfi, De Pasquale, & Zonta, 2006;Astolfi & Zonta, 1999;Fretts & Usher, 1997;Nahum & Stanislaw, 2002;Raymond, Cnattingius, & Kiely, 1994;Salihu et al, 2008). Conversely, studies have also found young maternal age to be a risk factor associated with preterm delivery (Adams, Elam-Evans, Wilson, & Gilbertz, 2000;Fraser, Brockert, & Ward, 1995), neonatal mortality (Gilbert, Jandial, Field, Bigelow, & Danielsen, 2004), and low Apgar score (Chen, Wen, Demissie, Rhoads, & Walker, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Paternal Age on Fetal Birth Outcomes

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research investigating the role of paternal age in adverse birth outcomes is limited. This population-based retrospective cohort study used the Missouri maternally linked data set from 1989 to 2005 to assess whether paternal age affects fetal birth outcomes: low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), stillbirth, and small size for gestational age (SGA). We examined these outcomes among infants across seven paternal age-groups (<20, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-45, and >45 years) using the generalized estimating equation framework. Compared with infants born to younger fathers (25-29 years), infants born to fathers aged 40 to 45 years had a 24% increased risk of stillbirth but a reduced risk of SGA. A 48% increased risk of late stillbirth was observed in infants born to advanced paternal age (>45 years). Moreover, advanced paternal age (>45 years) was observed to result in a 19%, 13%, and 29% greater risk for LBW, PTB, and VPTB (very preterm birth) infants, respectively. Infants born to fathers aged 30 to 39 years had a lower risk of LBW, PTB, and SGA, whereas those born to fathers aged 24 years or younger had an elevated likelihood of experiencing these same adverse outcomes. These findings demonstrate that paternal age influences birth outcomes and warrants further investigation.

show abstract

Prediction of term birth weight in Hispanic women using an equation based on maternal characteristics

Cited by 30 publications

References 13 publications

Correlação entre peso fetal estimado por ultrassonografia e peso neonatal

Correlação entre peso fetal estimado por ultrassonografia e peso neonatal

Ultrasound alone is inferior to combination methods for predicting fetal weight

The Effect of Paternal Age on Fetal Birth Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About