Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging 2013; 23(03): 266-268
DOI: 10.4103/0971-3026.120270
Genitourinary and Obstetric Radiology

Validation of the global reference for fetal weight and birth weight percentiles

Anirudh B Badade
Director, Chikitsa Ultrasound Training and Research Centre, Mumbai, India
,
Amar Bhide
FRCOG Consultant in Maternal - Fetal Medicine and Obstetrics Fetal Medicine Unit St. George′s Hospital, London, India
,
Purnima Satoskar
Nowrosjee Wadia Maternity Hospital, Mumbai, India
,
Darshan Wadekar
Nowrosjee Wadia Maternity Hospital, Mumbai, India
› Author Affiliations Financial support and sponsorship Nil.
› Further Information
Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the global reference curves adapted on the basis of WHO data for India and the Hadlock reference curves fit the population in India and to validate the reference curves. The data were retrieved retrospectively from the records of women registration for antenatal care at a charitable maternity hospital in Mumbai, India. All pregnancies were dated on CRL obtained before 14 weeks. Births before 34 th week were excluded. The expected frequencies of birth weights below the 1 st , 5 th , 10 th , 50 th , 90 th , 95 th and 99 th centiles from three reference ranges were compared with observed frequencies. It was found that the WHO generic reference adapted to India significantly underpredicted the birth weights and that the Hadlock reference ranges significantly overpredicted the birth weights. The use of generic reference adapted to Sri Lanka showed a better fit to the observed data. We concluded that global reference curves adapted on the basis of WHO data for India and the Hadlock reference ranges do not fit all the population in India and the charts need validation. Reference charts modified on the basis of data for Sri Lankan population show a better fit to the observed data, and therefore are more appropriate for use in clinical practice in South India.

Keywords

Birth weights - reference range - validation


Publication History

Article published online:
30 July 2021

© 2013. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Gardosi J, Mongelli M, Wilcox M, Chang A. Chang. An adjustable fetal weight standard. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1995;6:168-74.
  • 2 Dominguez H, Schramm TK, Gislason GH, Norgaard ML, Raunsø J, Abildstrøm SZ, et al. National Background is Associated with Disparities in Initiation and Persistence to Statin Treatment in Subjects with Diabetes in Denmark. Front Pharmacol 2010;1:142.
  • 3 Comstock RD, Castillo EM, Lindsay SP. Four-Year Review of the Use of Race and Ethnicity in Epidemiologic and Public Health Research. Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:611-9.
  • 4 Bhopal R. Ethnicity, Race and Health in multicultural societies: Foundations for better epidemiology, public health and healthcare., Chapter: Collecting ethnicity and health data. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. p. 75.
  • 5 Gill PS, Bhopal R, Wild S, Kai J. Limitations and potential of country of birth as proxy for ethnic group. BMJ 2005;330:196.
  • 6 Ott WJ. Small for gestational age fetus and neonatal outcome: Reevaluation of the relationship. Am J Perinatol 1995;12:396-400.
  • 7 Sung IK, Vohr B, Oh W. Growth and neurodevelopmental outcome of very low birth weight infants with intrauterine growth retardation: Comparison with control subjects matched by birth weight and gestational age. J Pediatr 1993;123:618-24.
  • 8 Doctor BA, O′Riordan MA, Kirchner HL, Shah D, Hack M. Perinatal correlates and neonatal outcomes of small for gestational age infants born at term gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:652-9.
  • 9 Smedler AC, Faxelius G, Bremme K, Lagerstrom M. Psychological development in children born with very low birth weight after severe intrauterine growth retardation: A 10-year follow-up study. Acta Paediatr 1992;81:197-203.
  • 10 Mikolajczyk RT, Zhang J, Betran AP, Souza JP, Mori R, Gulmezoglu AM, et al. A global reference for fetal-weight and birthweight percentiles. Lancet 2011;377:1855-61.
  • 11 Antenatal care Routine care for the healthy pregnant woman. Clinical Guideline 6. National Institute of Clinical Excellence. 2003. www.nice.org.uk.
  • 12 Hadlock F, Harrist R, Martinez-Poyer J. In Utero Analysis ofFetal Growth: A Sonographic Weight Standard′. Radiology 1991;181:129-33.
  • 13 Hutcheon JA, Zhang X, Cnattingius S, Kramer MS, Platt RW. Customised birthweight percentiles: Does adjusting for maternal characteristics matter? BJOG 2008;115:1397-404.
  • 14 Hutcheon JA, Zhang X, Platt RW, Cnattingius S, Kramer MS. The case against customised birthweight standards. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2011;25:11-6.
  • 15 Taipale P, Hiilsemaa V. Predicting Delivery Date by Ultrasound and Last Menstrual Period in Early Gestation. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97:189-94.