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

Simplified models to assess newborn gestational age in low-middle income countries: findings from a multicountry, prospective cohort study

Alliance for Maternal and Newborn Health Improvement (AMANHI) Gestational Age Study Group et al. BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction: Preterm birth is the leading cause of child mortality. This study aimed to develop and validate programmatically feasible and accurate approaches to estimate newborn gestational age (GA) in low resource settings.

Methods: The WHO Alliance for Maternal and Newborn Health Improvement (AMANHI) study recruited pregnant women from population-based cohorts in five countries (Bangladesh, Ghana, Pakistan, Tanzania and Zambia). Women <20 weeks gestation by ultrasound-based dating were enrolled. Research staff assessed newborns for: (1) anthropometry, (2) neuromuscular/physical signs and (3) feeding maturity. Machine-learning techniques were used to construct ensemble models. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed by areas under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: 7428 liveborn infants were included (n=536 preterm, <37 weeks). The Ballard examination was biased compared with ultrasound dating (mean difference: +9 days) with 95% limits of agreement (LOA) -15.3 to 33.6 days (precision ±24.5 days). A model including 10 newborn characteristics (birth weight, head circumference, chest circumference, foot length, breast bud diameter, breast development, plantar creases, skin texture, ankle dorsiflexion and infant sex) estimated GA with no bias, 95% LOA ±17.3 days and an AUC=0.88 for classifying the preterm infant. A model that included last menstrual period (LMP) with the 10 characteristics had 95% LOA ±15.7 days and high diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.91). An alternative simpler model including birth weight and LMP had 95% LOA of ±16.7 and an AUC of 0.88.

Conclusion: The best machine-learning model (10 neonatal characteristics and LMP) estimated GA within ±15.7 days of early ultrasound dating. Simpler models performed reasonably well with marginal increases in prediction error. These models hold promise for newborn GA estimation when ultrasound dating is unavailable.

Keywords: child health; obstetrics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: The WHO and study sites received funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) to conduct this study. The statistician performing the machine learning analysis (JW) is an employee of Metrum Research Group which received funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. BB, CBA, CG, DHH, JH, LH, MK, FM, KS, MSS and JW report research grants from the BMGF during the conduct of the study. ACL reported research grants from the NICHD and BMGF, and does consultancy to WHO.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of Alliance for Maternal and Newborn Health Improvement GA study participants. GA, gestational age; US, ultrasound.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A–F) Bland-Altman plots (with bias and trendline). (A) LMP, (B) Ballard examination, (C) model A: top 10 newborn characteristics, (D) model B: top 10 characteristics+LMP, (E) model C: birth weight+LMP and (F) model D: birth weight+head circumference. LMP, last menstrual period.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Ranking of 10 top predictors included in the machine learning model*. *The limits of agreement on Y axis indicate that 95% of estimated values of gestational age (GA) estimated by the machine learning model including the predictor are within ±y value days of the gold standard ultrasound estimated GA (machine learning models have zero mean bias). **Each predictor listed is cumulative, that is, in addition to the aforementioned predictors. (ie, machine learning model with birth weight AND head circumference predict GA within ±18.4 days of early ultrasound GA).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Receiver operating curves (ROC) for classification of preterm infants, (A) <37 weeks and (B) <34 weeks. Model A: 10 newborn characteristics: birth weight, head circumference, chest circumference, foot length, breast bud diameter, breast development, foot surface (plantar creases), skin texture, ankle dorsiflexion, infant sex. Model B: 10 newborn characteristics+LMP. Model C: Birth weight+LMP. Model D: Birth weight+head circumference. The point of each ROC curve intersection with the dotted line shows the point of 80% sensitivity, chosen as a desired threshold of sensitivity for a clinical screening tool. The dot on the ROC curve shows the Youden Index, the point of maximum sensitivity+specificity. AUC, area under the curve; LMP, last menstrual period.

References

    1. Chawanpaiboon S, Vogel JP, Moller A-B, et al. Global, regional, and national estimates of levels of preterm birth in 2014: a systematic review and modelling analysis. Lancet Glob Health 2019;7:e37–46. 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30451-0 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liu L, Oza S, Hogan D, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000-15: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the sustainable development goals. Lancet 2016;388:3027–35. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31593-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Katz J, Lee AC, Kozuki N, et al. Mortality risk in preterm and small-for-gestational-age infants in low-income and middle-income countries: a pooled country analysis. Lancet 2013;382:417–25. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60993-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kramer MS, McLean FH, Boyd ME, et al. The validity of gestational age estimation by menstrual dating in term, preterm, and postterm gestations. JAMA 1988;260:3306–8. 10.1001/jama.1988.03410220090034 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lynch CD, Zhang J. The research implications of the selection of a gestational age estimation method. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2007;21 Suppl 2:86–96. 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2007.00865.x - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources