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
Review
. 2018;5(4):388-398.
doi: 10.1007/s40471-018-0168-6. Epub 2018 Sep 20.

Current Issues in the Development of Foetal Growth References and Standards

Eric O Ohuma  1 , Tsi Njim  2 , Megan C Sharps  3
Affiliations
Review

Current Issues in the Development of Foetal Growth References and Standards

Eric O Ohuma et al. Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2018.

Abstract

Purpose of review: This paper discusses the current issues in the development of foetal charts and is informed by a scoping review of studies constructing charts between 2012 and 2018.

Recent findings: The scoping review of 20 articles revealed that there is still a lack of consensus on how foetal charts should be constructed and whether an international chart that can be applied across populations is feasible. Many of these charts are in clinical use today and directly affect the identification of at risk newborns that require treatment and nutritional strategies. However, there is no agreement on important design features such as inclusion and exclusion criteria; sample size and agreement on definitions such as what constitutes a healthy population of pregnant women that can be used for constructing foetal standards.

Summary: This paper therefore reiterates some of these current issues and the scoping review showcases the heterogeneity in the studies developing foetal charts between 2012 and 2018. There is no consensus on these pertinent issues and hence if not resolved will lead to continued surge of foetal reference and standard charts which will only exacerbate the current problem of not being able to make direct comparisons of foetal size and growth across populations.

Keywords: Charts; Fetal biometry; Fetal measurements; Foetal growth; References; Standards.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

    1. Cole TJ. The development of growth references and growth charts. Ann Hum Biol. 2012;39(5):382–394. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jensen AR. Galton’s legacy to research on intelligence. J Biosoc Sci. 2002;34(2):145–172. - PubMed
    1. Briceno F, Restrepo H, Paredes R, Cifuentes R. Charts for fetal age assessment based on fetal sonographic biometry in a population from Cali, Colombia. J Ultrasound Med. 2013;32(12):2135–2143. - PubMed
    1. Grantz KL, Hediger ML, Liu D, Buck Louis GM. Fetal growth standards: the NICHD fetal growth study approach in context with INTERGROWTH-21st and the World Health Organization Multicentre Growth Reference Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(2S):S641–SS55. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Papageorghiou AT, Ohuma EO, Altman DG, Todros T, Cheikh Ismail L, Lambert A, et al. International standards for fetal growth based on serial ultrasound measurements: the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. Lancet. 2014;384(9946):869–879. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources