ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2021
A New Approach for Classifying Fetal Growth Restriction.
Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metformin and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes among pregnant women with gestational diabetes in the United Kingdom: A population-based cohort study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- Food insecurity during pregnancy and associated perinatal outcomes: a scoping review.Epidemiologic reviews · 2025Article
- Expected and Desirable Preterm and Small Infant Growth Patterns.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024Review
- On the study of fetal growth restriction: time to abandon SGA.European journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Inferring fetal growth restriction as rare, severe, and stable over time.European journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Fetal growth trajectories of babies born large-for-gestational age in the LIFECODES Fetal Growth Study.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- An application of group-based trajectory modeling to define fetal growth phenotypes among small-for-gestational-age births in the LIFECODES Fetal Growth Study.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Leveraging the placenta to advance neonatal care.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- First Year Metabolic and Hormonal Behavior Define two Different Populations of SGA Newborn for Weight or Height.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2022Article
- The limits of small-for-gestational-age as a high-risk category.European journal of epidemiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFetal growth restriction is commonly defined using small for gestational age (SGA) birth (birthweight < 10th percentile) as a proxy, but this approach is problematic because most SGA infants are small but healthy. In this proof-of-concept study, we sought to develop a new approach for identifying fetal growth restriction at birth that combines information on multiple, imperfect measures of fetal growth restriction in a probabilistic manner.
methodsWe combined information on birthweight, placental weight, placental malperfusion lesions, maternal disease, and fetal acidemia using latent profile analysis to classify fetal growth in births at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal, Canada, 2001-2009. We examined the clinical characteristics and health outcomes of infants classified as growth-restricted and nongrowth-restricted by our model, and among the subgroup of growth-restricted infants who had a birthweight ≥10th percentile (i.e., would have been missed by the conventional SGA proxy).
resultsAmong 26,077 births, 345 (1.3%) were classified as growth-restricted by our latent profile model. Growth-restricted infants were more likely than nongrowth-restricted infants to have an Apgar score <7 (10% vs. 2%), have hypoglycemia at birth (17% vs. 3%), require neonatal intensive care unit admission (59% vs. 6%), die in the perinatal period (3.8% vs. 0.2%), and require an emergency cesarean delivery (42% vs. 15%). Risks remained elevated in growth-restricted infants who were not SGA, suggesting our model identified at-risk infants not detected using the SGA proxy.
conclusionsLatent profile analysis is a promising strategy for classifying growth restriction at birth in fetal growth restriction research.
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.