Differences in Birth Weight for Gestational Age Distributions According to the Measures Used to Assign Gestational Age

被引:69
作者
Callaghan, William M. [1 ]
Dietz, Patricia M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Div Reprod Hlth, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA
关键词
fetal development; gestational age; infant; low birth weight; INTRAUTERINE GROWTH; FETAL-GROWTH; UNITED-STATES; PRETERM; RATES; CONSEQUENCES; POPULATION; CURVES; TRENDS;
D O I
10.1093/aje/kwp468
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Population-based standards for infant size for gestational age depend on accurate assessments of birth weight and gestational age; the accuracy of the latter measure has been questioned. The authors sought to explore how different methods of assigning gestational age in vital records data affect distributions of birth weight for gestational age. The 2005 US natality file was used to create 4 measures of gestational age for singleton births consisting of measures found on the 1989 (last menstrual period (LMP) and clinical estimate) and 2003 (LMP and obstetric estimate) revisions of the US standard birth certificate: clinical or obstetric estimate and LMP-based estimate agree within 7 days ("gold standard"); clinical estimate only; obstetric estimate only; and LMP-based estimate only. Birth weight for gestational age distributions differed according to the measurement of gestational age. Regardless of birth certificate revision, the median, 10th, and 90th percentile distributions were virtually identical for the gold standard, clinical estimate, and obstetric estimate. Birth weights for the LMP estimate were higher for preterm births and lower for postterm births for both birth certificate revisions. Agreement between the gold standard estimate and clinical and obstetric estimates of gestational age suggests that using the LMP-based estimate for establishing norms should be revisited.
引用
收藏
页码:826 / 836
页数:11
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]   Trends in fetal growth among singleton gestations in the United States and Canada, 1985 through 1998 [J].
Ananth, CV ;
Wen, SW .
SEMINARS IN PERINATOLOGY, 2002, 26 (04) :260-267
[2]   Adult consequences of fetal growth restriction [J].
Barker, David J. P. .
CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 49 (02) :270-283
[3]   Metabolic syndrome in childhood: Association with birth weight, maternal obesity, and gestational diabetes mellitus [J].
Boney, CM ;
Verma, A ;
Tucker, R ;
Vohr, BR .
PEDIATRICS, 2005, 115 (03) :E290-E296
[4]   Gestational age estimates from singleton births conceived using assisted reproductive technology [J].
Callaghan, William M. ;
Schieve, Laura A. ;
Dietz, Patricia M. .
PAEDIATRIC AND PERINATAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2007, 21 :79-85
[5]   A comparison of LMP-based and ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age using linked California livebirth and prenatal screening records [J].
Dietz, Patricia M. ;
England, Lucinda J. ;
Callaghan, William M. ;
Pearl, Michelle ;
Wier, Megan L. ;
Kharrazi, Martin .
PAEDIATRIC AND PERINATAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2007, 21 :62-71
[6]   Estimated fetal weights versus birth weights: should the reference intrauterine growth curves based on birth weights be retired? [J].
Ehrenkranz, Richard A. .
ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD-FETAL AND NEONATAL EDITION, 2007, 92 (03) :F161-F162
[7]   Intrauterine growth restriction increases morbidity and mortality among premature neonates [J].
Garite, Thomas J. ;
Clark, Reese ;
Thorp, James A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 191 (02) :481-487
[8]   INUTERO ANALYSIS OF FETAL GROWTH - A SONOGRAPHIC WEIGHT STANDARD [J].
HADLOCK, FP ;
HARRIST, RB ;
MARTINEZPOYER, J .
RADIOLOGY, 1991, 181 (01) :129-133
[9]   The missing data problem in birth weight percentiles and thresholds for "Small-for-Gestational-Age" [J].
Hutcheon, Jennifer A. ;
Platt, Robert W. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2008, 167 (07) :786-792
[10]   Reconciling the high rates of preterm and postterm birth in the United States [J].
Joseph, K. S. ;
Huang, Ling ;
Liu, Shiliang ;
Ananth, Cande V. ;
Allen, Alexander C. ;
Sauve, Reg ;
Kramer, Michael S. .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2007, 109 (04) :813-822