ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022
Percent error of ultrasound examination to estimate fetal weight at term in different categories of birth weight with focus on maternal diabetes and obesity.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. 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, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of Novel Prenatal Prediction Models for Birth-Weight Estimation in Low-Risk Third-Trimester Pregnancies.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Discordance between abdominal circumference and estimated fetal weight in the late third trimester and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes.American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM · 2026Article
- The role of sonographic estimated fetal weight compared to clinical assessment: superior accuracy only in extreme fetal weight cases.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Customized Birthweight Standard for the Population in the Republic of Kazakhstan.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2025Article
- Investigating the Accuracy of Ultrasound Imaging in Measuring Fetal Weight in Comparison with the Actual Postpartum Weight.Pediatric reports · 2025Article
- Fetal Birth Weight Prediction in the Third Trimester: Retrospective Cohort Study and Development of an Ensemble Model.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2025Article
- Evaluation of sonographic and clinical measures in early versus late third trimester for birth weight prediction.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Article
- Fetal Growth Associated with Maternal Rheumatoid Arthritis and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Intrauterine Growth Restriction-Prediction and Peripartum Data on Hospital Care.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- 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
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSonography based estimate of fetal weight is a considerable issue for delivery planning. The study evaluated the influence of diabetes, obesity, excess weight gain, fetal and neonatal anthropometrics on accuracy of estimated fetal weight with respect to the extent of the percent error of estimated fetal weight to birth weight for different categories.
methodsMulticenter retrospective analysis from 11,049 term deliveries and fetal ultrasound biometry performed within 14 days to delivery. Estimated fetal weight was calculated by Hadlock IV. Percent error from birth weight was determined for categories in 250 g increments between 2500 g and 4500 g. Estimated fetal weight accuracy was categorized as accurate ≤ 10% of birth weight, under- and overestimated by > ± 10% - ± 20% and > 20%.
resultsDiabetes was diagnosed in 12.5%, obesity in 12.6% and weight gain exceeding IOM recommendation in 49.1% of the women. The percentage of accurate estimated fetal weight was not significantly different in the presence of maternal diabetes (70.0% vs. 71.8%, p = 0.17), obesity (69.6% vs. 71.9%, p = 0.08) or excess weight gain (71.2% vs. 72%, p = 0.352) but of preexisting diabetes (61.1% vs. 71.7%; p = 0.007) that was associated with the highest macrosomia rate (26.9%). Mean percent error of estimated fetal weight from birth weight was 2.39% ± 9.13%. The extent of percent error varied with birth weight with the lowest numbers for 3000 g-3249 g and increasing with the extent of birth weight variation: 5% ± 11% overestimation in the lowest and 12% ± 8% underestimation in the highest ranges.
conclusionDiabetes, obesity and excess weight gain are not necessarily confounders of estimated fetal weight accuracy. Percent error of estimated fetal weight is closely related to birth weight with clinically relevant over- and underestimation at both extremes. This work provides detailed data regarding the extent of percent error for different birth weight categories and may therefore improve delivery planning.
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.