Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35603475›Full record

Observational studyThe journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians2022

Derivation and assessment of a sex-specific fetal growth standard.

Nathan R Blue, Amanda A Allshouse, Sarah Heerboth, William Grobman, Brian Mercer, Anthony Shanks, Julia M Bregand-White, Hyagriv Simhan, Uma M Reddy, George Saade and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
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

12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Nathan R BlueDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Amanda A AllshouseDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Sarah HeerbothDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
William GrobmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Brian MercerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Anthony ShanksDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Julia M Bregand-WhiteDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Hyagriv SimhanDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Uma M ReddyDivision of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
George SaadeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
Samuel ParryDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Robert M SilverDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
University of Utah · USIndiana University · USMagee-Womens Hospital · USMetroHealth · USThe Ohio State University · USThe University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · USUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USYale University · US

Funding

Utah Women's Reproductive Health Research Career Development ProgramK12HD085816 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI SILVER, ROBERT M. · 2015 to 2024
$3.2M
Prevention of Preterm Birth in high Risk Nulliparous PatientsU10HD063047 · NICHD · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WAPNER, RONALD · 2010 to 2014
$1.9M
Preterm Birth in Nulliparous Women: An Understudied Population at Great RiskU10HD063053 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI SILVER, ROBERT M. · 2010 to 2014
$1.7M
Preterm Birth in Nulliparous Women: An Understudied Population at Great Risk U10HD063020 · NICHD · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI GROBMAN, WILLIAM ADAM · 2010 to 2014
$1.6M
Preterm Birth in Nulliparous Women: An Understudied Population at Great RiskU10HD063046 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI WING, DEBORAH A · 2010 to 2014
$1.6M
Preterm Birth in Nulliparous Women: An Understudied Population at Great RiskU10HD063041 · NICHD · MAGEE-WOMEN'S RES INST AND FOUNDATION · PI SIMHAN, HYAGRIV N · 2010 to 2014
$1.5M
Preterm Birth in Nulliparous Women: An Understudied Population at Great RiskU10HD063048 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI PARRY, SAMUEL I. · 2010 to 2014
$1.5M
Dissecting the Genetic Etiology of Preterm Birth in Nulliparous WomenU10HD063037 · NICHD · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI HAAS, DAVID M. · 2010 to 2014
$1.2M
Adverse Outcomes in Nulliparous Pregnancies: The Ohio CollaborativeU10HD063072 · NICHD · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI MERCER, BRIAN M. · 2010 to 2014
$1.2M
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD085816NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063020NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063037NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063041NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063046NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063047NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063048NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063053NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD063072
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo derive a prescriptive sex-specific fetal growth standard and assess clinical management and outcomes according to sex-specific growth status. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a secondary analysis of the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be (nuMoM2b), a prospective observational study of 10,038 nulliparas from eight U.S. centers who underwent ultrasounds at 14-20 and 22-29 weeks with outcomes ascertained after delivery. From these, we selected a nested cohort of lower risk participants (excluded those with chronic hypertension, pre-gestational diabetes, suspected aneuploidy, and preterm delivery) to derive a sex-specific equation for expected fetal growth using fetal weights by ultrasound and at birth. We compared the male-female discrepancy in the rate of weight <10th (small for gestational age [SGA]) and >90th (large for gestational age [LGA]) percentiles between the sex-specific and sex-neutral (Hadlock) standards. Using the full unselected cohort, we then assessed outcomes and clinical management according to sex-specific SGA and LGA status.

resultsOverall, 7280 infants in the lower risk nested cohort were used to derive a sex-specific equation with fetal sex included as an equation intercept. The sex-neutral standard diagnosed SGA more often in female newborns (21% vs. 13%,

conclusionThe Hadlock sex-neutral standard generates sex disparities in SGA and LGA at birth. Our sex-specific standard resolves these disparities and has the potential to improve accuracy of growth pathology risk stratification.

Indexed as

Fetal DevelopmentInfant, Newborn, DiseasesBirth WeightFemaleFetal Growth RetardationFetal WeightGestational AgeHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInfant, Small for Gestational AgeMalePregnancybirth weightFetal growthfetal sexlarge for gestational agesmall for gestational age

Identifiers

PMID35603475
PMCPMC11338582
OpenAlexW4281293881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.