ArticleBMC pediatrics2015
Validation of the foot length measure as an alternative tool to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in a low-resource setting like Nepal: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of postnatal clinical scoring methods and foot length measurement for estimating gestational age and birthweight of newborns in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of neonatal foot length to identify preterm and low birthweight infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2020Pooled it
- Guideline
- Community-based cluster randomized controlled trial: empowering households to identify and provide appropriate care for low-birthweight newborns in Nepal.BMC public health · 2020Trial
- Observational
- The use of newborn foot length to identify low birth weight and preterm babies in Papua New Guinea: A diagnostic accuracy study.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Measuring newborn foot length to estimate gestational age in a high risk Northwest Ethiopian population.PloS one · 2020Article
- The significance of foot length at the initiation of the Ponseti method: a prospective study.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2019Article
- Anthropometric measurements can identify small for gestational age newborns: a cohort study in rural Tanzania.BMC pediatrics · 2019Article
- Determining gestational age and preterm birth in rural Guatemala: A comparison of methods.PloS one · 2018Article
- Fetal foot length at delivery as a tool for determining gestation length in non-macerated stillbirths.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe majority of infants who die in the neonatal period are born with a low birth weight (LBW, <2500 grams), or prematurely (before 37 weeks). Most deaths among these infants could be prevented with simple, low-cost interventions like kangaroo mother care (KMC) or prevention and early identification of infection. It is difficult, however, to determine birth weight and gestational age in community settings, and therefore necessary to find an appropriate alternative screening tool that can identify LBW and preterm infants.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Nepal to compare the validity of using three different foot length measurement methods (plastic ruler, measuring tape, and paper footprint) as screening tools for identifying babies with birth weights <2000 grams or infants born preterm (<37 weeks). LBW was defined as less than 2000 grams because of the implication for use of KMC for these infants. Non-parametric receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was completed to determine which measurement method best predicted LBW and preterm birth. For the method that was the best predictor for each outcome (i.e. highest area under the curve), further analyses were completed to determine sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values of an operational screening cutoff to predict LBW or preterm birth in this setting.
resultsOf the 811 infants included in this study, 30 infants had LBW and 54 were born preterm. The plastic ruler was the measurement method with the highest area under the curve, and thus predictive score for estimating both outcomes, so operational cutoffs were identified based on this method. An operational cutoff of 7.2 cm was identified to screen for infants weighing <2000 grams at birth (sensitivity: 75.9%, specificity: 90.3%), and 7.8 cm was determined as the operational cutoff to identify preterm infants (sensitivity: 76.9%, specificity: 53.9%).
conclusionsIn Nepal, at least in community settings, foot length measurement with a hard ruler may be a valid proxy to identify at-risk infants when birth weight or gestational age is unavailable. Further studies and piloting should be conducted to identify exact cutoffs that can be used within community settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.