4.7 Article

United States Birth Weight Reference Corrected For Implausible Gestational Age Estimates

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 133, 期 5, 页码 844-853

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2013-3285

关键词

reference; growth charts; gestational age; birth weight; small for gestational age; United States

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES:To provide an updated US birth weight for gestational age reference corrected for likely errors in last menstrual period (LMP)-based gestational age dating, as well as means and SDs, to enable calculation of continuous and categorical measures of birth weight for gestational age.METHODS:From the 2009-2010 US live birth files, we abstracted singleton births between 22 and 44 weeks of gestation with at least 1 nonmissing estimate of gestational age (ie, LMP or obstetric/clinical) and birth weight. Using an algorithm based on birth weight and the concordance between these gestational age estimates, implausible LMP-based gestational age estimates were either excluded or corrected by using the obstetric/clinical estimate. Gestational age- and sex-specific birth weight means, SDs, and smoothed percentiles (3rd, 5th, 10th, 90th, 95th, 97th) were calculated, and the 10th and 90th percentiles were compared with published population-based references.RESULTS:A total of 7818201 (99% of eligible) births were included. The LMP-based estimate of gestational age comprised 85% of the dataset, and the obstetric/clinical estimate comprised the remaining 15%. Cut points derived from the current reference identified approximate to 10% of births as 10th and 90th percentiles at all gestational weeks, whereas cut points derived from previous US-based references captured variable proportions of infants at these thresholds within the preterm and postterm gestational age ranges.CONCLUSIONS:This updated US-based birth weight for gestational age reference corrects for likely errors in gestational age dating and allows for the calculation of categorical and continuous measures of birth size.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据