Prenatal application of the individualized fetal growth reference

52Citations
Citations of this article
67Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The individualized reference for defining small for gestational age (SGA) at birth has gained popularity in recent years. However, its utility on fetal assessment has not been evaluated. The authors compare an individualized with an ultrasound reference in predicting poor perinatal outcomes. Data from a large clinical trial in predominantly white US women (1987-1991) with singleton pregnancies (n = 9,526) were used. The individualized reference classified fewer SGA fetuses than the ultrasound reference, but the risks of adverse outcomes were similar between fetuses classified by both references. The risk increased substantially only when the percentiles fell below the 5th percentile (likelihood ratio positive at birth = 2.68 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00, 3.58) and 3.13 (95% CI: 2.34, 4.18) for ultrasound and individualized references, respectively). SGA fetuses defined by either the individualized or ultrasound reference alone had risk ratios of adverse outcomes of 1.91 (95% CI: 0.77, 4.77) and 1.18 (95% CI: 0.37, 3.77), respectively, compared with normal fetuses (the difference between these 2 risk ratios, P = 0.71). The authors conclude that neither the ultrasound-based nor the individualized reference does well in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. The 5th percentile may be a better cutpoint than the 10th percentile in defining SGA.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, J., Mikolajczyk, R., Grewal, J., Neta, G., & Klebanoff, M. (2011). Prenatal application of the individualized fetal growth reference. American Journal of Epidemiology, 173(5), 539–543. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq411

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free