A new method for customized fetal growth reference percentiles.

PLoS One

Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.

Published: March 2023

AI Article Synopsis

  • Customized fetal growth charts may not be reliable since the assumption of normally distributed birthweight values and a constant coefficient of variation has not been tested.
  • A study using data from 2288 pregnancies showed that standard deviation does not change in a linear manner with mean birthweight, leading to discrepancies in calculated percentiles.
  • A new model using heteroscedastic regression was developed, showing potential benefits for identifying abnormal growth percentiles compared to traditional methods, although prediction performance was similar across all models.

Article Abstract

Background: Customized fetal growth charts assume birthweight at term to be normally distributed across the population with a constant coefficient of variation at earlier gestational ages. Thus, standard deviation used for computing percentiles (e.g., 10th, 90th) is assumed to be proportional to the customized mean, although this assumption has never been formally tested.

Methods: In a secondary analysis of NICHD Fetal Growth Studies-Singletons (12 U.S. sites, 2009-2013) using longitudinal sonographic biometric data (n = 2288 pregnancies), we investigated the assumptions of normality and constant coefficient of variation by examining behavior of the mean and standard deviation, computed following the Gardosi method. We then created a more flexible model that customizes both mean and standard deviation using heteroscedastic regression and calculated customized percentiles directly using quantile regression, with an application in a separate study of 102, 012 deliveries, 37-41 weeks.

Results: Analysis of term optimal birthweight challenged assumptions of proportionality and that values were normally distributed: at different mean birthweight values, standard deviation did not change linearly with mean birthweight and the percentile computed with the normality assumption deviated from empirical percentiles. Composite neonatal morbidity and mortality rates in relation to birthweight < 10th were higher for heteroscedastic and quantile models (10.3% and 10.0%, respectively) than the Gardosi model (7.2%), although prediction performance was similar among all three (c-statistic 0.52-0.53).

Conclusions: Our findings question normality and constant coefficient of variation assumptions of the Gardosi customization method. A heteroscedastic model captures unstable variance in customization characteristics which may improve detection of abnormal growth percentiles.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00912132.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10019672PMC
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0282791PLOS

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

standard deviation
16
fetal growth
12
constant coefficient
12
coefficient variation
12
customized fetal
8
normality constant
8
birthweight
5
method customized
4
growth
4
growth reference
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!