Literature DB >> 24117928

Validation of obstetric estimate using early ultrasound: 2007 California birth certificates.

Danielle T Barradas1, Patricia M Dietz, Michelle Pearl, Lucinda J England, William M Callaghan, Martin Kharrazi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Obstetric estimate (OE) of gestational age, recently added to the standard US birth certificate, has not been validated. Using early ultrasound-based gestational age (prior to 20 weeks gestation) as the criterion standard, we estimated the prevalence of preterm delivery and the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of gestational age estimates based on OE.
METHODS: We analyzed 165 148 singleton livebirth records (38% of California livebirths during the study period) with linked early ultrasound information from a statewide California prenatal screening programme. OE of gestational age estimates was obtained from birth certificates.
RESULTS: Prevalence of preterm delivery (<37 weeks gestation) was higher based on early ultrasound (8.1%) compared with preterm delivery based on OE (7.1%). Sensitivity for preterm birth when using OE for gestational age was 74.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] [74.1, 75.6]), and PPV was 85.1% (95% CI [84.4, 85.7]). Incongruence, defined as a ≥ 14-day difference between early-ultrasound-derived gestational age and OE, was 3.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: OE reported on the birth certificate may underestimate the prevalence of preterm delivery, particularly among women of non-Hispanic non-white race and ethnicity and women with lower educational attainment, public insurance at time of delivery, and missing prepregnancy BMI. Additional validation studies in other samples of births are needed. Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  gestational age; preterm; validity

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24117928      PMCID: PMC4741369          DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12083

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol        ISSN: 0269-5022            Impact factor:   3.980


  10 in total

1.  Does a discrepancy between gestational age determined by biparietal diameter and last menstrual period sometimes signify early intrauterine growth retardation?

Authors:  T Larsen; T H Nguyen; G Greisen; G Engholm; H Møller
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.531

2.  Maternal obesity is a potential source of error in mid-trimester ultrasound estimation of gestational age.

Authors:  M Simic; I A Wåhlin; K Marsál; K Källén
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 3.  The research implications of the selection of a gestational age estimation method.

Authors:  Courtney D Lynch; Jun Zhang
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.980

4.  Differences in birth weight for gestational age distributions according to the measures used to assign gestational age.

Authors:  William M Callaghan; Patricia M Dietz
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-02-25       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  How accurate is fetal biometry in the assessment of fetal age?

Authors:  F A Chervenak; D W Skupski; R Romero; M K Myers; M Smith-Levitin; Z Rosenwaks; H T Thaler
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Influence of medical conditions and lifestyle factors on the menstrual cycle.

Authors:  Andrew S Rowland; Donna Day Baird; Stuart Long; Ganesa Wegienka; Siobán D Harlow; Michael Alavanja; Dale P Sandler
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.822

7.  Births: preliminary data for 2011.

Authors:  Brady E Hamilton; Joyce A Martin; Stephanie J Ventura
Journal:  Natl Vital Stat Rep       Date:  2012-10-03

8.  Fetal age assessment based on ultrasound head biometry and the effect of maternal and fetal factors.

Authors:  Synnøve Lian Johnsen; Svein Rasmussen; Rita Sollien; Torvid Kiserud
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.636

9.  A comparison of LMP-based and ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age using linked California livebirth and prenatal screening records.

Authors:  Patricia M Dietz; Lucinda J England; William M Callaghan; Michelle Pearl; Megan L Wier; Martin Kharrazi
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.980

10.  Mid-trimester ultrasound prediction of gestational age: advantages and systematic errors.

Authors:  K Källén
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 7.299

  10 in total
  15 in total

1.  Validation of selected items on the 2003 U.S. standard certificate of live birth: New York City and Vermont.

Authors:  Patricia Dietz; Jennifer Bombard; Candace Mulready-Ward; John Gauthier; Judith Sackoff; Peggy Brozicevic; Melissa Gambatese; Michael Nyland-Funke; Lucinda England; Leslie Harrison; Sherry Farr
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  Exposure to Community Homicide During Pregnancy and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Within-Community Matched Design.

Authors:  Dana E Goin; Anu M Gomez; Kriszta Farkas; Scott C Zimmerman; Ellicott C Matthay; Jennifer Ahern
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Early pregnancy prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus risk using prenatal screening biomarkers in nulliparous women.

Authors:  Brittney M Snyder; Rebecca J Baer; Scott P Oltman; Jennifer G Robinson; Patrick J Breheny; Audrey F Saftlas; Wei Bao; Andrea L Greiner; Knute D Carter; Larry Rand; Laura L Jelliffe-Pawlowski; Kelli K Ryckman
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 5.602

4.  Associations between green space and preterm birth: Windows of susceptibility and interaction with air pollution.

Authors:  Yi Sun; Paige Sheridan; Olivier Laurent; Jia Li; David A Sacks; Heidi Fischer; Yang Qiu; Yu Jiang; Ilona S Yim; Luo-Hua Jiang; John Molitor; Jiu-Chiuan Chen; Tarik Benmarhnia; Jean M Lawrence; Jun Wu
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 9.621

5.  Prevalence and descriptive epidemiology of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in the United States: A multistate, population-based retrospective study, 1999-2010.

Authors:  Renuka Kapoor; Vijaya Kancherla; Yanyan Cao; Jacob Oleson; Jonathan Suhl; Mark A Canfield; Charlotte M Druschel; Russell S Kirby; Robert E Meyer; Paul A Romitti
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2018-12-13       Impact factor: 2.344

6.  Predicting Preterm Birth Among Women Screened by North Carolina's Pregnancy Medical Home Program.

Authors:  Christine M Tucker; Kate Berrien; M Kathryn Menard; Amy H Herring; Julie Daniels; Diane L Rowley; Carolyn Tucker Halpern
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2015-11

7.  Variations in Maternal Factors and Preterm Birth Risk among Non-Hispanic Black, White, and Mixed-Race Black/White Women in the United States, 2017.

Authors:  Bridgette E Blebu; Olivia Waters; Candice Taylor Lucas; Annie Ro
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2021-11-26

8.  Validation of obstetric estimate of gestational age on US birth certificates.

Authors:  Patricia M Dietz; Jennifer M Bombard; Yalonda L Hutchings; John P Gauthier; Melissa A Gambatese; Jean Y Ko; Joyce A Martin; William M Callaghan
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Occurrence of fatal police violence during pregnancy and hazard of preterm birth in California.

Authors:  Dana E Goin; Anu Manchikanti Gomez; Kriszta Farkas; Catherine Duarte; Deborah Karasek; Brittany D Chambers; Andrea V Jackson; Jennifer Ahern
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 3.103

10.  Oral Corticosteroids and Risk of Preterm Birth in the California Medicaid Program.

Authors:  Kristin Palmsten; Gretchen Bandoli; Jim Watkins; Gabriela Vazquez-Benitez; Todd P Gilmer; Christina D Chambers
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract       Date:  2020-08-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.