Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31201230›Full record

ArticlePediatrics2019

A 2017 US Reference for Singleton Birth Weight Percentiles Using Obstetric Estimates of Gestation.

Izzuddin M Aris, Ken P Kleinman, Mandy B Belfort, Anjali Kaimal, Emily Oken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 113 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

113 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Perinatal prediction of mortality for neonates born at 22-25 weeks gestation.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Izzuddin M ArisHarvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Division of Chronic Disease Research Across the Lifecourse, Departments of Population Medicine and izzuddin_aris@harvardpilgrim.org.
Ken P KleinmanDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts; and.
Mandy B BelfortDepartment of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Anjali KaimalHarvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Division of Chronic Disease Research Across the Lifecourse, Departments of Population Medicine and.
Emily OkenHarvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Division of Chronic Disease Research Across the Lifecourse, Departments of Population Medicine and.

Funding

Common and distinct early environmental influences on cardiometabolic and respiratory health: Mechanisms and methodsUH3OD023286 · OD · HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE, INC. · PI OKEN, EMILY · 2018 to 2022
$11.7M
Translational Research Core - Health Engagement & Action Translational (HEAT)P30DK092924 · NIDDK · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Alyce Sophia Adams, HILARY Kessler SELIGMAN · 2011 to 2026
$9.2M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092924NIH HHS UH3 OD023286
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide an updated birth weight-for-gestational age (BW-for-GA) reference in the United States by using the most recent, nationally representative birth data with obstetric estimates of gestational age (GA).

methodsWe abstracted 3 285 552 singleton births between 22 and 42 weeks' gestation with nonmissing race and/or ethnicity, infant sex, parity, birth weight, and obstetric estimate of GA from the 2017 US natality files. We used 2 techniques (nonlinear, resistant smoothing [4253H] and lambda-mu-sigma) to derive smoothed BW-for-GA curves and compared resulting BW-for-GA cut-points at the third, 10th, 90th, and 97th percentiles with US references from 1999 to 2009.

resultsThe smoothed BW-for-GA curves from both techniques overlapped considerably with each other, with strong agreements seen between the 2 techniques (>99% agreement; κ-statistic >0.9) for BW-for-GA cut-points at the third, 10th, 90th, and 97th percentiles across all GAs. Cut-points from 2017 using the lambda-mu-sigma method captured 9.8% to 10.2% of births <10th and >90th percentiles and 2.6% to 3.3% of births below the third and above the 97th percentile across all GAs. However, cut-points from US references in 1999 and 2009 (when GA was based on last menstrual period) captured a much larger range of proportions of 2017 births at these thresholds, especially among preterm and postterm GA categories.

conclusionsWe have provided an updated BW-for-GA reference in the United States using the most recent births with obstetric estimates of GA and information to calculate continuous measures of birth size that are sex or parity specific.

Indexed as

Birth WeightGestational AgeFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleReference ValuesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31201230
PMCPMC6615520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.