MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410642205 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2025.05.017

Small for gestational age subgroups have differential morbidity, growth, and neurodevelopment at age 2: the INTERBIO-21st Newborn Study

2025· article· en· W4410642205 on OpenAlexaff
Aris T. Papageorghiou, María Clara Restrepo–Méndez, Rose McGready, Fernando C. Barros, François Nosten, Shama Munim, Roseline Ochieng, Rachel Craik, Hellen C. Barsosio, James A. Berkley, Maria Helena Catelli de Carvalho, Michelle Fernandes, Leila Cheikh Ismail, Ann Lambert, Shane A. Norris, Eric O. Ohuma, Alan Stein FRCPsych, Chrystelle O.O. Tshivuila-Matala, Adele Winsey, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Stephen Kennedy, José R. Villar

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreUniversidade Federal de PelotasBill and Melinda Gates FoundationPhilips Medical Systems
KeywordsMedicineGestational ageSmall for gestational ageDifferential (mechanical device)PediatricsObstetricsPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Small for gestational age is a complex perinatal syndrome associated with increased neonatal morbidity, mortality, and impaired childhood growth and neurodevelopment. Current classifications rely primarily on birthweight, which does not capture the heterogeneity of the condition nor predict long-term health outcomes. Here we aim to identify and characterize distinct small for gestational age subgroups and assess their neonatal and early childhood health trajectories. OBJECTIVE: To refine the classification of small for gestational age by identifying subgroups based on maternal, fetal, and environmental factors and evaluating their associations with neonatal morbidity, growth, and neurodevelopment at age 2. STUDY DESIGN: Study enrolled small for gestational age and non-small for gestational age newborns defined by the <10th centile of international standards with moderate (≥third-<10th centile) and severe (<third centile) small for gestational age subgroups; we assessed their growth, health, nutrition, motor development, and neurodevelopment up to age 2. We used 2-step cluster analysis to identify small for gestational age subgroups, and a probabilistic approach to choose the optimal subgroup model based on a statistical measure of fit. We performed logistic regression analysis (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval) to assess health and development outcomes among subgroups using the non-small for gestational age as reference group, adjusting for key confounders. RESULTS: We enrolled 5153 non-small for gestational age and 1549 small for gestational age newborns: moderate (≥third-<10th centile) small for gestational age=947 and severe (<third centile) small for gestational age=602. We identified 9 small for gestational age subgroups: "no main condition detected" (29.0%); "previous low birthweight or preterm birth" (14.6%); "severe maternal disease" (12.0%); "maternal short stature" (11.6%); "hypertensive disorders" (9.6%); "extrauterine infection" (6.8%); "previous miscarriage(s)" (6.5%); "smoking" (5.2%); and "maternal undernutrition" (4.7%). Severe small for gestational age newborns in the "severe maternal disease" (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-6.0), "previous low birthweight or preterm birth" (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-4.8), and "smoking" (odds ratio, 5.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-21.8) subgroups had increased risk of neonatal and long-term morbidity and low anthropometric measures at age 2 as compared to the non-small for gestational age group. Moderate small for gestational age newborns in the "hypertensive disorders" subgroup had increased risk of neonatal morbidity (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-4.6) and higher odds of scoring <10th centile of normative values in language (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-12.0) and positive behavior (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.5). The "severe maternal disease" subgroup had also higher risk of deficit (<10th centile of normative values) in language (odds ratio, 5.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-24.8) and positive behavior (odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.6). CONCLUSION: Small for gestational age comprises heterogeneous subgroups with distinct patterns of neonatal morbidity, postnatal growth, and neurodevelopmental outcomes up to age 2.

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)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207