Improving customized fetal biometry by longitudinal modelling

References

• Pallotto EK, Kilbride HW. Perinatal outcome and later implications of intrauterine growth restriction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006;49:257–69
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker DM, Marlow N. Neurocognitive outcome following fetal growth restriction. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2008;93:F322–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gluckman PD, Hanson MA, Cooper C, Thornburg KL. Effect of in utero and early-life conditions on adult health and disease. N Engl J Med 2008;359:61–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bukowski R, Uchida T, Smith GC, et al. Individualized norms of optimal fetal growth: fetal growth potential. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:1065–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narchi H, Skinner A, Williams B. Small for gestational age neonates – are we missing some by only using standard population growth standards and does it matter? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010;23:48–54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardosi J, Clausson B, Francis A. The value of customised centiles in assessing perinatal mortality risk associated with parity and maternal size. BJOG 2009;116:1356–63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueras F, Figueras J, Meler E, et al. Customised birthweight standards accurately predict perinatal morbidity. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2007;92:F277–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelbaya TA, Nardo LG. Customised fetal growth chart: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol 2005;25:445–50
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Clausson B, Gardosi J, Francis A, Cnattingius S. Perinatal outcome in SGA births defined by customised versus population-based birthweight standards. BJOG 2001;108:830–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ego A, Subtil D, Grange G, et al. Customized versus population-based birth weight standards for identifying growth restricted infants: a French multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194:1042–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robson SC, Martin WL, Morris RK. The investigation and management of the small-for-gestational-age fetus: green-top guideline no. 31, 2nd ed. London, United Kingdom: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2013
   Google Scholar
• Hutcheon JA, Zhang X, Cnattingius S, et al. Customised birthweight percentiles: does adjusting for maternal characteristics matter? BJOG 2008;115:1397–404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutcheon JA, Zhang X, Platt RW, et al. The case against customised birthweight standards. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2011;25:11–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morken NH, Kallen K, Jacobsson B. Fetal growth and onset of delivery: a nationwide population-based study of preterm infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;195:154–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutcheon JA, Walker M, Platt RW. Assessing the value of customized birth weight percentiles. Am J Epidemiol 2011;173:459–67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemachandra AH, Klebanoff MA. Use of serial ultrasound to identify periods of fetal growth restriction in relation to neonatal anthropometry. Am J Hum Biol 2006;18:791–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merialdi M, Caulfield LE, Zavaleta N, et al. Fetal growth in Peru: comparisons with international fetal size charts and implications for fetal growth assessment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;26:123–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overpeck MD, Hediger ML, Zhang J, et al. Birth weight for gestational age of Mexican American infants born in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:943–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee W, Balasubramaniam M, Deter RL, et al. Fetal growth parameters and birth weight: their relationship to neonatal body composition. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;33:441–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang TC, Robson SC, Boys RJ, Spencer JA. Prediction of the small for gestational age infant: which ultrasonic measurement is best? Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:1030–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang TC, Robson SC, Spencer JA, Gallivan S. Identification of fetal growth retardation: comparison of Doppler waveform indices and serial ultrasound measurements of abdominal circumference and fetal weight. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:230–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pang MW, Leung TN, Sahota DS, et al. Customizing fetal biometric charts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;22:271–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt P, Staboulidou I, Soergel P, et al. Individualized growth charts for ultrasound measurements can significantly improve fetal monitoring. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2007;276:315–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Newnham JP, Evans SF, Michael CA, et al. Effects of frequent ultrasound during pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1993;342:887–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald W, Newnham J, Gurrin L, Evans S. Effect of frequent prenatal ultrasound on birthweight: follow up at 1 year of age. Western Australian Pregnancy Cohort (Raine) Working Group. Lancet 1996;348:482
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardosi J, Chang A, Kalyan B, et al. Customised antenatal growth charts. Lancet 1992;339:283–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Sharman RS, et al. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements–a prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;151:333–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin ME, Coffey M, Johnson H, et al. Universal vs. risk factor-based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus: detection rates, gestation at diagnosis and outcome. Diabet Med 2000;17:26–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaillard R, Eilers PH, Yassine S, et al. Risk factors and consequences of maternal anaemia and elevated haemoglobin levels during pregnancy: a population-based prospective cohort study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2014;28:213–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaillard R, de Ridder MA, Verburg BO, et al. Individually customised fetal weight charts derived from ultrasound measurements: the Generation R Study. Eur J Epidemiol 2011;26:919–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar