Observational studyEuropean journal of pediatrics2024
Extrauterine growth restriction in very-low-birthweight infants: prevalence and concordance according to Fenton, Olsen, and INTERGROWTH-21st growth charts in a multicenter Spanish cohort.
Observational study in European journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal post-discharge growth according to bronchopulmonary dysplasia severity in very preterm infants: a cohort study.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Extrauterine growth restriction definitions and associated factors among Colombian preterm infants: a case control study.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Early-onset preeclampsia exposure and hospital outcomes of very preterm infants: a retrospective analysis of feeding intolerance and hospital morbidities.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Impact of colostrum oropharyngeal immunotherapy on postnatal growth in preterm infants based on early gut microbiota-host interaction patterns: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.International breastfeeding journal · 2025Article
- Postnatal Growth Assessment of the Very-Low-Birth-Weight Preterm Infant.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Clinical Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Feeding Intolerance After Surgery for Neonatal Necrotizing Enterocolitis.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Classification of very low birth weight infants as small for gestational age: International vs. national standards.PloS one · 2025Article
- Impact of the Choice of Diagnostic Criteria and Growth Reference on the Prevalence of Extrauterine Growth Restriction in Extremely-Low-Birthweight Infants.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple criteria and growth references have been proposed for extrauterine growth restriction (EUGR). We hypothesized that these may impact the diagnosis of EUGR. The objective was to evaluate the prevalence of EUGR with its different definitions and the concordance according to Fenton, Olsen, and INTERGROWTH-21st in very-low-birthweight (VLBW) infants. This is an observational, retrospective, and multicenter study including VLBW infants from the Spanish SEN1500 Network from 2011 to 2020. Patients with major congenital anomalies, embryopathies, and gestational age less than 24 weeks were excluded. EUGR prevalence was calculated at discharge with cross-sectional, longitudinal, "true" cross-sectional, and "true" longitudinal definitions. Concordance was assessed with Fleiss' kappa coefficient. 23582 VLBW infants from 77 NICUs were included. In total, 50.4% were men with a median of gestational age of 29 (4) weeks. The prevalence of EUGR (cross-sectional, longitudinal, and "true") was variable for weight, length, and head circumference. Overall, the prevalence was higher with Fenton and lower with Olsen (cross-sectional and "true" cross-sectional) and INTERGROWTH-21st (longitudinal and "true" longitudinal). Agreement among the charts by weight was good only for cross-sectional EUGR and moderate for longitudinal, "true" cross-sectional, and "true" longitudinal. Concordance was good or very good for EUGR by length and head circumference.Conclusions: The prevalence of EUGR with the most commonly used definitions was variable in the cohort. Agreement among growth charts was moderate for all the definitions of EUGR by weight except cross-sectional and good or very good for length and head circumference. The choice of reference chart can impact the establishment of the diagnosis of EUGR. What is known: • EUGR has been defined in the literature and daily practice considering weight, length and head circumference with multiple criteria (cross-sectional, longitudinal, and "true" definition) • Different growth charts have been used for EUGR diagnosis What is new: • Prevalence of EUGR is variable depending on the definition and growth chart used in our cohort of VLBW infants • For the most frequently EUGR criteria used, traditionally considering weight, concordance among Fenton, Olsen and INTERGROWTH-21st growth charts is only moderate for all the definitions of EUGR by weight except cross-sectional definition. Concordance among the charts is good or very good for the different criteria of EUGR by head circumference and length.
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.