MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173401043 · doi:10.1002/uog.15959

Prediction of small‐for‐gestational‐age neonate by third‐trimester fetal biometry and impact of ultrasound–delivery interval

2016· article· en· W2173401043 on OpenAlexafffund
Q. Reboul, A. Delabaere, Zhong‐Cheng Luo, Anne Monique Nuyt, Yuquan Wu, Céline Chauleur, William D. Fraser, François Audibert

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeGestational ageObstetricsUltrasoundConfidence intervalPercentileSmall for gestational ageProspective cohort studyPregnancyBirth weightFetusReceiver operating characteristicThird trimesterSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives To compare third‐trimester ultrasound screening methods to predict small‐for‐gestational age (SGA), and to evaluate the impact of the ultrasound–delivery interval on screening performance. Methods In this prospective study, data were collected from a multicenter singleton cohort study investigating the links between various exposures during pregnancy with birth outcome and later health in children. We included women, recruited in the first trimester, who had complete outcome data and had undergone third‐trimester ultrasound examination. Demographic, clinical and biological variables were also collected from both parents. We compared prediction of delivery of a SGA neonate (birth weight < 10th percentile) by the following methods: abdominal circumference (AC) Z‐score based on Hadlock curves (Hadlock AC), on INTERGROWTH‐21st Project curves (Intergrowth AC) and on Salomon curves (Salomon AC); estimated fetal weight (EFW) Z‐score based on Hadlock curves (Hadlock EFW) and on customized curves from Gardosi (Gardosi EFW); and fetal growth velocity based on change in AC between second and third trimesters (FGVAC). We also assessed the following ultrasound–delivery intervals: ≤ 4 weeks, ≤ 6 weeks and ≤ 10 weeks. Results Third‐trimester ultrasound was performed in 1805 patients with complete outcome data, of whom 158 (8.8%) delivered a SGA neonate. Ultrasound examination was at a median gestational age of 32 (interquartile range, 31–33) weeks. The ultrasound–delivery interval was ≤ 4 weeks in 17.2% of cases, ≤ 6 weeks in 48.1% of cases and ≤ 10 weeks in 97.3% of cases. Areas under the receiver–operating characteristics curve (AUC) were 0.772 for Salomon AC, 0.768 for Hadlock EFW, 0.766 for Hadlock AC, 0.765 for Intergrowth AC, 0.708 for Gardosi EFW and 0.674 for FGVAC (all P < 0.0001). The screening method with the highest AUC for an ultrasound–delivery interval ≤ 4 weeks was Salomon AC (AUC, 0.856), ≤ 6 weeks was Hadlock AC (AUC, 0.824) and ≤ 10 weeks was Salomon AC (AUC, 0.780). At a fixed 10% false‐positive rate, the best detection rates were 60.0%, 54.1% and 42.1% for intervals ≤ 4, ≤ 6 and ≤ 10 weeks, respectively. Conclusion Third‐trimester ultrasound measurements provide poor to moderate prediction of SGA. A shorter ultrasound–delivery interval provides better prediction than does a longer interval. Further studies are needed to test the effect of including maternal or biological characteristics in SGA screening. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207