Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40908880›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2025

Impact of race-based customization on detection of fetal growth restriction.

P Ramesh, L Lemon, J C Larkin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

P RameshDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID 0009-0004-5329-0344
L LemonDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
J C LarkinDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFetal growth standards determine which fetuses are diagnosed with fetal growth restriction (FGR) and become candidates for enhanced fetal monitoring. Given the existence of race-based differences in fetal and neonatal weights, we sought to determine the impact of race-based customization of fetal growth curves on the antenatal detection of FGR.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 8731 individuals who identified as either White or Black and delivered a liveborn singleton at Magee-Womens Hospital (MWH), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, between January 2003 and January 2013, with at least one sonographic measurement of estimated fetal weight (EFW) taken at 23-41 weeks' gestation. We compared the rates of antenatal FGR diagnosis when EFW was assessed using three distinct growth standards: (1) a standard used at MWH from 2012 to 2018, customized based on the height, weight, parity and race of the pregnant individual (Cust-Race); (2) the same standard without adjustment for race (Cust-NoRace); and (3) the Hadlock standard. Analyses were stratified by the race of the pregnant individual and classification of the neonate as small-for-gestational age (SGA) based on birth weight < 10

resultsThe study population included 1458 (16.7%) individuals who self-identified as Black and 7273 (83.3%) who self-identified as White. SGA was diagnosed in 663 (7.6%) newborns, and was significantly more common in those born to Black vs White individuals (172/1458 (11.8%) vs 491/7273 (6.8%); P < 0.001). Among SGA newborns, 286 (43.1%) had at least one antenatal ultrasound scan that met the diagnostic criteria for FGR using the Cust-Race standard, compared with 306 (46.2%) using Cust-NoRace and 335 (50.5%) using Hadlock; only the difference in FGR diagnosis rate between Cust-Race and Hadlock was significant (P = 0.007). For newborns of Black individuals who were SGA at birth, the Cust-Race growth standard diagnosed 52 (30.2%) cases of antenatal FGR, compared with 72 (41.9%) for Cust-NoRace and 77 (44.8%) for Hadlock; again, only the difference in FGR diagnosis rate between Cust-Race and Hadlock was significant (P = 0.005). The antenatal detection of FGR among newborns of White individuals who were SGA at birth was similar across standards, with 234 (47.7%) detected by Cust-Race, 234 (47.7%) by Cust-NoRace and 258 (52.5%) by Hadlock.

conclusionsCustomization of growth standards with a race variable did not improve the antenatal detection of FGR compared with the Hadlock standard. The Hadlock standard demonstrated an improved ability to detect FGR among Black patients without a negative effect on White patients. Moving away from race-specific growth standards may help to eliminate inequities in resource allocation and reduce racial disparities in obstetric care. © 2025 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Indexed as

Fetal Growth RetardationUltrasonography, PrenatalAdultBirth WeightBlack or African AmericanFemaleFetal DevelopmentFetal WeightGestational AgeGrowth ChartsHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, Small for Gestational AgePennsylvaniaPregnancyRetrospective Studiescustomized growth curvefetal growth restrictiongrowth standardHadlockobstetric racial disparitysmall‐for‐gestational age

Identifiers

PMID40908880
PMCPMC12488198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.