The clinical performance and population health impact of birth weight-for-gestational age indices with regard to adverse neonatal outcomes in term infants

Author:

John SidORCID,Joseph K SORCID,Fahey John,Liu ShiliangORCID,Kramer Michael S

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundDespite the recent creation of several birth weight-for-gestational age references and standards, none has proven superior. We identified birth weight-for-gestational age cut-offs, and corresponding United States population-based, Intergrowth 21st and World Health Organization centiles associated with higher risks of adverse neonatal outcomes, and evaluated their ability to predict serious neonatal morbidity and neonatal mortality (SNMM).Methods and findingsThe study population comprised singleton live births at 37-41 weeks’ gestation in the United States, 2003-2017. Birth weight-specific SNMM, which included 5-minute Apgar score<4, neonatal seizures, assisted ventilation and neonatal death, was modeled by gestational week using penalized B-splines. We estimated the birth weights at which SNMM odds was minimized (and higher by 10%, 50% and 100%), and identified the corresponding population, Intergrowth 21st and World Health Organization (WHO) centiles. We then evaluated the individual- and population-level performance of these cut-offs for predicting SNMM. The study included 40,179,663 live births at 37-41 weeks’ gestation and 991,486 SNMM cases. Among female singletons at 39 weeks’ gestation, SNMM odds was lowest at 3,203 g birth weight (population, Intergrowth and WHO centiles 40, 52 and 46, respectively), and 10% higher at 2,835 g and 3,685 g (population centiles 11th and 82nd, Intergrowth centiles 17th and 88th and WHO centiles 15th and 85th). SNMM odds were 50% higher at 2,495 g and 4,224 g and 100% higher at 2,268 g and 4,593 g. Birth weight cut-offs were poor predictors of SNMM. For example, the birth weight cut-off associated with 10% higher odds of SNMM among female singletons at 39 weeks’ gestation resulted in a sensitivity of 12.5%, specificity of 89.4% and population attributable fraction of 2.1%, while the cut-off associated with 50% higher odds resulted in a sensitivity of 2.9%, specificity of 98.4% and population attributable fraction of 1.3%.ConclusionsBirth weight-for-gestational age cut-offs and centiles perform poorly when used to predict adverse neonatal outcomes in individual infants, and the population impact associated with these cut-offs is also small.FundingCanadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-67125 and PJT153439).Author summaryWhy was this study doneDespite the recent creation of several birth weight-for-gestational age references and standards, no method has proved superior for identifying small-for-gestational age (SGA), appropriate-for-gestational age (AGA) and large-for-gestational age (LGA) infants.For instance, infants classified as AGA by the Intergrowth Project 21st standard and SGA by national references have a higher risk of perinatal death compared with infants deemed AGA by both.What did the researchers do and find?Our study identified the birth weights at each gestational week at which the risk of serious neonatal morbidity and neonatal mortality (SNMM) was lowest and elevated to varying degrees, and showed that the corresponding Intergrowth and WHO centiles were right-shifted compared with population centiles.Outcome-based birth weight and centile cutoffs performed poorly for predicting serious neonatal morbidity and neonatal mortality (SNMM) at the individual level.The population attributable fractions associated with these Outcome-based birth weight and centile cutoffs cut-offs were also small.The birth weight distributions of live births and SNMM cases (at each gestational week) overlapped substantially, showing that birth weight-for-gestational age in isolation cannot serve as an accurate predictor of adverse neonatal outcomes, irrespective of the cut-off used to identify SGA and LGA infants.What do these findings mean?Using birth weight-for-gestational age cutoffs to identify SGA, AGA and LGA infants does not add significantly to individual- or population-level prediction of adverse neonatal outcomes.Birth weight-for-gestational age centiles are best suited for use in multivariable prognostic functions, in conjunction with other prognostic indicators of adverse perinatal outcomes.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3