ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2025
A comparative analysis of INTERGROWTH-21st and the World Health Organisation fetal growth chart in detection of term small for gestational age newborns and prediction of short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart in detecting term small for gestational age (SGA) neonates and predicting short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.
designA retrospective cohort study.
settingDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi. SUBJECTS: Term singleton pregnancies between July and December 2018 with ultrasound growth scan done within 4 weeks of delivery. Pregnancies with structural and chromosomal abnormalities and multiple gestations were excluded. OUTCOME: The estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated using the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart based on ultrasound measurements. Fetuses with EFW below the 10th percentile were classified as SGA. Neonates were confirmed as SGA based on similar postnatal weight percentile. Short-term adverse perinatal outcomes were also analysed.
resultsA total of 932 records were screened, and 478 were included in the analysis. The sensitivity of the WHO fetal growth chart (70.2%; 95% CI: 60.4%, 78.8%) was higher than the INTERGROWTH-21st (45.2%; 95% CI: 35.4%, 55.3%) for predicting neonatal SGA. The WHO fetal growth chart predicted more SGA neonates when compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st (AUC=0.75, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.80 and AUC=0.63, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.68, respectively). Both charts were similar in predicting the short-term adverse perinatal outcomes; AUC (95% CI) was 0.77 (0.70, 0.83) for INTERGROWTH-21st and 0.78 (0.72, 0.85) for the WHO fetal growth chart.
conclusionThe WHO fetal growth chart demonstrates significantly better accuracy in predicting term SGA neonates compared with INTERGROWTH-21st. Further, both charts have similar prediction abilities for short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.
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.