ArticleAJOG global reports2025
The comparison of perinatal clinical characteristics between severe small for gestational age and mild small for gestational age according to the latest birth curve in China.
Article in AJOG global reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSmall for gestational age(SGA) is associated with increased risks of short-term complications and neonatal death.The severity of SGA can be grouped according to the weight of newborns.
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the perinatal clinical characteristics of small for gestational age and to compare the predictive value of 2 growth curves for adverse neonatal outcomes. STUDY
designA total of 131 neonates diagnosed with small for gestational age at Peking University First Hospital from January to June 2021 were included in the study. According to the percentile of birthweight, the neonates were divided into 2 groups: 105 in the mild small-for-gestational-age group (birthweight between the 3rd and 10th percentile) and 26 in the severe small-for-gestational-age group (birthweight lower than the 3rd percentile). The general data and clinical information of mothers and neonates were collected to compare the differences between maternal complications and neonatal outcomes in different groups of small for gestational ages.
resultsThe incidence of preeclampsia and preterm delivery in the severe small for gestational age group was significantly higher than that in the mild small-for-gestational-age group. The incidence of neonatal hypoglycemia and neonatal anemia in the severe small-for-gestational-age group was significantly higher than that in the mild small-for-gestational-age group. The maternal body weight and body mass index in the mild small-for-gestational-age group were lower than those in the severe small-for-gestational-age group. In addition, the 2020 birthweight curve had better sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value in predicting adverse neonatal outcome than the 2015 birthweight curve.
conclusionThe risk of neonatal complications was significantly higher in the severe small-for-gestational-age group. Perinatal monitoring of small-for-gestational-age patients should be strengthened. Mild small for gestational age was associated with lower maternal body mass index. The 2020 neonatal curve is more valuable for adverse neonatal outcome prediction.
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.