Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2015 Mar 17;5(3):e006743.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006743.

Small-for-gestational age and large-for-gestational age thresholds to predict infants at risk of adverse delivery and neonatal outcomes: are current charts adequate? An observational study from the Born in Bradford cohort

T Norris  1 , W Johnson  2 , D Farrar  3 , D Tuffnell  4 , J Wright  3 , N Cameron  1
Affiliations
Observational Study

Small-for-gestational age and large-for-gestational age thresholds to predict infants at risk of adverse delivery and neonatal outcomes: are current charts adequate? An observational study from the Born in Bradford cohort

T Norris et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: Construct an ethnic-specific chart and compare the prediction of adverse outcomes using this chart with the clinically recommended UK-WHO and customised birth weight charts using cut-offs for small-for-gestational age (SGA: birth weight <10th centile) and large-for-gestational age (LGA: birth weight >90th centile).

Design: Prospective cohort study.

Setting: Born in Bradford (BiB) study, UK.

Participants: 3980 White British and 4448 Pakistani infants with complete data for gestational age, birth weight, ethnicity, maternal height, weight and parity.

Main outcome measures: Prevalence of SGA and LGA, using the three charts and indicators of diagnostic utility (sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC)) of these chart-specific cut-offs to predict delivery and neonatal outcomes and a composite outcome.

Results: In White British and Pakistani infants, the prevalence of SGA and LGA differed depending on the chart used. Increased risk of SGA was observed when using the UK-WHO and customised charts as opposed to the ethnic-specific chart, while the opposite was apparent when classifying LGA infants. However, the predictive utility of all three charts to identify adverse clinical outcomes was poor, with only the prediction of shoulder dystocia achieving an AUROC>0.62 on all three charts.

Conclusions: Despite being recommended in national clinical guidelines, the UK-WHO and customised birth weight charts perform poorly at identifying infants at risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. Being small or large may increase the risk of an adverse outcome; however, size alone is not sensitive or specific enough with current detection to be useful. However, a significant amount of missing data for some of the outcomes may have limited the power needed to determine true associations.

Keywords: EPIDEMIOLOGY; NEONATOLOGY; PERINATOLOGY.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Venn diagram of SGA classification in Pakistani infants (SGA, small-for-gestational age; BiB, Born in Bradford).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Venn diagram of LGA classification in Pakistani infants (LGA, large-for-gestational age; GROW, gestation-related optimal weight; BiB, Born in Bradford).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Venn diagram of SGA classification in White British infants (SGA, small-for-gestational age; GROW, gestation-related optimal weight; BiB, Born in Bradford).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Venn diagram of LGA classification in White British infants (LGA, large-for-gestational age; GROW, gestation-related optimal weight; BiB, Born in Bradford).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. de Onis M, Garza C, Victora CG et al. . The WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study: planning, study design, and methodology. Food Nutr Bull 2004;25(Supple 1):15S–26S. - PubMed
    1. SACN/RCPCH Expert Group. Application of WHO Growth Standards in UK 2007.
    1. Cole TJ, Freeman JV, Preece MA. British 1990 growth reference centiles for weight, height, body mass index and head circumference fitted by maximum penalized likelihood. Stat Med 1998;17:407–29. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980228)17:4<407::AID-SIM742>3.0.CO;2-L - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kelly Y, Panico L, Bartley M et al. . Why does birthweight vary among ethnic groups in the UK? Findings from the Millennium Cohort Study. J Public Health (Oxf) 2009;31:131–7. 10.1093/pubmed/fdn057 - DOI - PubMed
    1. West J, Lawlor DA, Fairley L et al. . UK-born Pakistani-origin infants are relatively more adipose than white British infants: findings from 8704 mother-offspring pairs in the Born-in-Bradford prospective birth cohort. J Epidemiol Community Health 2013;67:544–51. 10.1136/jech-2012-201891 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms