ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2016
Gestational dating by metabolic profile at birth: a California cohort study.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.
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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of heparinized syringes for measuring newborn metabolites in neonates with a central arterial line.Clinical biochemistry · 2022Trial
- Quantitative assessment of neonatal health using dried blood spot metabolite profiles and deep learning.Science translational medicine · 2026Article
- Longitudinal urine metabolic profiling and gestational age prediction in human pregnancy.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Accuracy of prenatal and postnatal biomarkers for estimating gestational age: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Developing a resiliency model for survival without major morbidity in preterm infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023Article
- Article
- Newborn screen metabolic panels reflect the impact of common disorders of pregnancy.Pediatric research · 2022Observational
- Targeted newborn metabolomics: prediction of gestational age from cord blood.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022Article
- Gestational Age, Newborn Metabolic Markers and Academic Achievement.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Machine learning prediction of gestational age from metabolic screening markers resistant to ambient temperature transportation: Facilitating use of this technology in low resource settings of South Asia and East Africa.Journal of global health · 2022Article
- Real world external validation of metabolic gestational age assessment in Kenya.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Immunoreactive Trypsinogen and Free Carnitine Changes on Newborn Screening after Birth in Patients Who Develop Type 1 Diabetes.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Machine learning guided postnatal gestational age assessment using new-born screening metabolomic data in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Article
- Metabolites from midtrimester plasma of pregnant patients at high risk for preterm birth.American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM · 2021Article
- Gestational age-dependent development of the neonatal metabolome.Pediatric research · 2021Article
- Gestational age dating using newborn metabolic screening: A validation study in Busia, Uganda.Journal of global health · 2021Article
- Racial and ethnic disparities in outcomes through 1 year of life in infants born prematurely: a population based study in California.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness of a gestational age metabolic algorithm for preterm and small-for-gestational-age classification.American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM · 2021Article
- Using AMANHI-ACT cohorts for external validation of Iowa new-born metabolic profiles based models for postnatal gestational age estimation.Journal of global health · 2021Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate gestational dating is a critical component of obstetric and newborn care. In the absence of early ultrasound, many clinicians rely on less accurate measures, such as last menstrual period or symphysis-fundal height during pregnancy, or Dubowitz scoring or the Ballard (or New Ballard) method at birth. These measures often underestimate or overestimate gestational age and can lead to misclassification of babies as born preterm, which has both short- and long-term clinical care and public health implications.
objectiveWe sought to evaluate whether metabolic markers in newborns measured as part of routine screening for treatable inborn errors of metabolism can be used to develop a population-level metabolic gestational dating algorithm that is robust despite intrauterine growth restriction and can be used when fetal ultrasound dating is not available. We focused specifically on the ability of these markers to differentiate preterm births (PTBs) (<37 weeks) from term births and to assign a specific gestational age in the PTB group. STUDY
designWe evaluated a cohort of 729,503 singleton newborns with a California birth in 2005 through 2011 who had routine newborn metabolic screening and fetal ultrasound dating at 11-20 weeks' gestation. Using training and testing subsets (divided in a ratio of 3:1) we evaluated the association among PTB, target newborn characteristics, acylcarnitines, amino acids, thyroid-stimulating hormone, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, and galactose-1-phosphate-uridyl-transferase. We used multivariate backward stepwise regression to test for associations and linear discriminate analyses to create a linear function for PTB and to assign a specific week of gestation. We used sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value to evaluate the performance of linear functions.
resultsAlong with birthweight and infant age at test, we included 35 of the 51 metabolic markers measured in the final multivariate model comparing PTBs and term births. Using a linear discriminate analyses-derived linear function, we were able to sort PTBs and term births accurately with sensitivities and specificities of ≥95% in both the training and testing subsets. Assignment of a specific week of gestation in those identified as PTBs resulted in the correct assignment of week ±2 weeks in 89.8% of all newborns in the training and 91.7% of those in the testing subset. When PTB rates were modeled using the metabolic dating algorithm compared to fetal ultrasound, PTB rates were 7.15% vs 6.11% in the training subset and 7.31% vs 6.25% in the testing subset.
conclusionWhen considered in combination with birthweight and hours of age at test, metabolic profile evaluated within 8 days of birth appears to be a useful measure of PTB and, among those born preterm, of specific week of gestation ±2 weeks. Dating by metabolic profile may be useful in instances where there is no fetal ultrasound due to lack of availability or late entry into care.
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.