Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39497086›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

Development and validation of an ultrasound-based estimated fetal weight reference for Chinese twin pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study.

Jing Yang, Hongzhao Yu, Yangyu Zhao, Zhihao Cheng, Yufeng Du, Pengbo Yuan, Aiqing Zhang, Yang Liu, Xiaoli Gong, Yang Yu and 8 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

18 authors.

Jing Yang *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Hongzhao Yu *Institute of Reproductive and Child Health, National Health Commission Key Laboratory of Reproductive Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Yangyu ZhaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhihao ChengInstitute of Reproductive and Child Health, National Health Commission Key Laboratory of Reproductive Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Yufeng DuDepartment of Epidemiology and Statistics, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, China.
Pengbo YuanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Aiqing ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yang LiuInstitute of Reproductive and Child Health, National Health Commission Key Laboratory of Reproductive Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Xiaoli GongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yang YuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yixin LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyan YouDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zhengzhou Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450000, China.
Nana HuangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Youzhen ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xiya SunDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Hongbo QiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 401147, China. qihongbo728@163.com.
Hong-Tian LiInstitute of Reproductive and Child Health, National Health Commission Key Laboratory of Reproductive Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China. lihongtian@pku.edu.cn.
Yuan WeiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China. weiyuanbysy@163.com.

Funding

Clinical Medicine Plus X-Young Scholars Project of Peking University PKU2021LCXQ009Emerging Engineering Interdisciplinary Young Scholars Project of Peking University PKU2023XGK015National Key Research and Development Program of China 2022YFA1303900National Key Research and Development Program of China 2023YFC2705900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFetal growth monitoring is important for twin pregnancies. However, there has been no clinically validated tool for monitoring fetal growth of twin pregnancies in China. This study aims to develop and validate a chorionicity-specific growth chart of ultrasound estimated fetal weight (EFW) for Chinese twin pregnancies.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study included all twin pregnancies who delivered two live fetuses with gestational age ≥ 34 weeks without severe obstetric complications at a tertiary hospital from January 2007 to March 2021. The participants were divided into a development set (delivered in or before December 2017) and a validation set (delivered in or after January 2018). Chorionicity-specific growth charts were created using the generalized additive models for location, scale, and shape (GAMLSS) based on the development set. The fetuses from the validation set were classified into three groups based on the last EFW: small-for-gestational-age (SGA) indicated by both the newly established twin charts and the Hadlock singleton chart currently used for twin pregnancies in China, suspected SGA indicated by only the singleton chart, and no SGA indicated by either chart. The incidence of neonatal outcomes among the three groups was then compared accordingly, including intensive care unit (NICU) stay length, respiratory diseases, and neurological disorders.

resultsThe development set included 883 twin pregnancies and a total of 6374 EFW measurements between 16 and 38 weeks of gestation, and the validation set included 801 twin pregnancies and 7630 EFW measurements. In the development set, monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twins had a significantly lower EFW compared to dichorionic diamniotic (DCDA) twins beginning at 26 weeks, with the difference gradually increasing thereafter, supporting the establishment of chorionicity-specific growth charts. Of the 1,602 twin neonates in the validation set, 103 (6.4%) were classified into the SGA group, 164 (10.2%) into the suspected SGA group, and 1335 (83.3%) into the no SGA group. The incidence of respiratory diseases and neurological disorders was comparable between the suspected SGA group and the no SGA group, but apparently higher in the SGA group. Meanwhile, NICU stay lengths were consistently longer for twins in the SGA group compared to the no SGA group (difference: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.31-0.83), with no significant differences observed between the suspected SGA and no SGA groups.

conclusionsThe fetal growth trajectories differed by chorionicity, with a lower EFW for MCDA twins beginning at 26 weeks. The establishment of chorionicity-specific growth chart could reduce overdiagnosis of SGA and improve fetal growth monitoring of twin pregnancies.

Indexed as

Fetal WeightPregnancy, TwinUltrasonography, PrenatalAdultChinaCohort StudiesEast Asian PeopleFemaleFetal DevelopmentFetal Growth RetardationGestational AgeGrowth ChartsHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, Small for Gestational AgePregnancyAdverse outcomesChorionicityEstimated fetal weightFetal growth restrictionGrowth chartsSmall for gestational ageTwin pregnancy

Identifiers

PMID39497086
PMCPMC11536931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.