ArticleCureus2025
Incidence of Fetal Macrosomia in the Cantonal Hospital Zenica: Retrospective Analysis (2020-2024).
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim The aim was to determine the incidence and temporal trends of fetal macrosomia at Cantonal Hospital Zenica between 2020 and 2024. Methods A retrospective analysis of all deliveries (n = 11,117) from 2020-2024 was performed. Macrosomia was defined as birth weight ≥4,000 g. Descriptive statistics, trend analysis, and simple linear regression relating total births and macrosomic births were used. Neonatal outcomes included mean birth weight and one‑ and five‑minute Apgar scores; parity, maternal age groups, and mode of delivery were examined. Chi‑square tests assessed yearly distribution changes. Results Of 11,117 deliveries, 1,625 (14.6%) were macrosomic. Annual macrosomia counts declined from 369 (2020) to 295 (2024) while total deliveries fell from 2,478 (2020) to 2,083 (2023) and rose to 2,118 (2024). Mean macrosomic birth weight was 4,263.0 g (annual range 4,254.1-4,270.8 g). Mean one‑minute and five‑minute Apgar scores were 7.89 and 8.80, respectively; 5.91% of neonates had one‑minute Apgar <7 and 1.48% had five‑minute Apgar <7. Primiparas accounted for 38.22% of macrosomic births (621/1,625) and experienced a high cesarean rate (62.32%). Simple linear regression showed a strong association between total and macrosomic births (R = 0.973; R2 = 0.947; p = 0.0052), though interpretation of the model slope requires caution. Yearly changes in parity distribution, maternal age groups, and mode of delivery were not statistically significant (chi‑square tests, all p>0.05). Conclusions Macrosomia constituted a substantial and relatively stable proportion (~14.6%) of births at this referral center, with generally favorable immediate neonatal outcomes and a high cesarean proportion among primiparas. Findings support continued emphasis on antenatal metabolic risk optimization, individualized delivery planning, and maintenance of intrapartum and neonatal emergency preparedness. Study limitations include the short (five‑year) time series and lack of individual covariates (BMI, GDM status, gestational age), which constrain causal inference and adjusted analyses.
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.