超声预测出生体重的有效性:在尼日利亚西南部拉各斯州郊区约鲁巴后裔健康孕妇队列中三种算法的研究

IF 0.1 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
C. Eze, KingsleyChibuike Cosmas, J. Nwamba, Ernest Ruto Upeh
{"title":"超声预测出生体重的有效性:在尼日利亚西南部拉各斯州郊区约鲁巴后裔健康孕妇队列中三种算法的研究","authors":"C. Eze, KingsleyChibuike Cosmas, J. Nwamba, Ernest Ruto Upeh","doi":"10.4103/wajr.wajr_6_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Accurate estimation of fetal birth weight is critical in determining the delivery route and management of the neonate. Purpose of Study: The purpose is to determine the accuracy of Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithm as predictors of birth weight in a cohort of fetuses of Yoruba descent. Materials and Methods: Fetal weight (FW) was estimated in a sample of 384 fetuses using Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithm while actual birth weight (ABW) was measured. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted and used to determine the accuracy and sensitivity of each algorithm. Results: Most babies (84.6%) had normal estimated fetal weight (EFW) and ABW; mean FW = 3.2 ± 0.5 kg); 10% had low weight while 5.5% were macrosomic. While EFW correlated positively and strongly with ABW, the Hadlock IV algorithm had the strongest correlation (r = 0.978). The Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithms had 92%, 72%, and 56% accuracy within the tenth centile, respectively. At 95% confidence interval, Hadlock IV was the most accurate predictor of normal birth and low birth weight (area under the curve [AUC] =0.91 and 0.94, respectively). Campbell was the most accurate predictor of macrosomia (AUC = 0.89). Conclusion: While Hadlock IV and Campbell algorithm are valid predictors, the Shepard model is a doubtful birth weight predictor among fetuses of Yoruba origin. When there is a need for absolute birth weight values, the Hadlock IV algorithm is preferred for suspected normal and low-weight babies while the Campbell model is preferred for fetuses weighing >4 kg among Yoruba fetuses.","PeriodicalId":29875,"journal":{"name":"West African Journal of Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of sonographic prediction of birth weight: A study of three algorithms in a cohort of healthy pregnant women of Yoruba descent in a suburb of Lagos state, Southwest Nigeria\",\"authors\":\"C. Eze, KingsleyChibuike Cosmas, J. Nwamba, Ernest Ruto Upeh\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/wajr.wajr_6_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Accurate estimation of fetal birth weight is critical in determining the delivery route and management of the neonate. Purpose of Study: The purpose is to determine the accuracy of Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithm as predictors of birth weight in a cohort of fetuses of Yoruba descent. Materials and Methods: Fetal weight (FW) was estimated in a sample of 384 fetuses using Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithm while actual birth weight (ABW) was measured. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted and used to determine the accuracy and sensitivity of each algorithm. Results: Most babies (84.6%) had normal estimated fetal weight (EFW) and ABW; mean FW = 3.2 ± 0.5 kg); 10% had low weight while 5.5% were macrosomic. While EFW correlated positively and strongly with ABW, the Hadlock IV algorithm had the strongest correlation (r = 0.978). The Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithms had 92%, 72%, and 56% accuracy within the tenth centile, respectively. At 95% confidence interval, Hadlock IV was the most accurate predictor of normal birth and low birth weight (area under the curve [AUC] =0.91 and 0.94, respectively). Campbell was the most accurate predictor of macrosomia (AUC = 0.89). Conclusion: While Hadlock IV and Campbell algorithm are valid predictors, the Shepard model is a doubtful birth weight predictor among fetuses of Yoruba origin. When there is a need for absolute birth weight values, the Hadlock IV algorithm is preferred for suspected normal and low-weight babies while the Campbell model is preferred for fetuses weighing >4 kg among Yoruba fetuses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"West African Journal of Radiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"West African Journal of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/wajr.wajr_6_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"West African Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/wajr.wajr_6_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:准确估计胎儿出生体重对于确定分娩路线和新生儿管理至关重要。研究目的:目的是确定Hadlock IV、Campbell和Shepard算法作为约鲁巴裔胎儿出生体重预测指标的准确性。材料和方法:使用Hadlock IV、Campbell和Shepard算法对384名胎儿样本进行胎儿体重(FW)估计,同时测量实际出生体重(ABW)。绘制了接收器工作特性曲线,并用于确定每种算法的准确性和灵敏度。结果:大多数婴儿(84.6%)具有正常的估计胎儿重量(EFW)和ABW;平均FW=3.2±0.5 kg);10%为低体重儿,5.5%为巨大儿。虽然EFW与ABW呈正相关,但Hadlock IV算法的相关性最强(r=0.978)。HadlockⅣ算法、Campbell算法和Shepard算法在十分位数内的准确率分别为92%、72%和56%。在95%置信区间下,Hadlock IV是正常出生和低出生体重的最准确预测因子(曲线下面积AUC=0.91和0.94)。Campbell是巨大儿最准确的预测因子(AUC=0.89)。结论:虽然Hadlock IV和Campbell算法是有效的预测因子,但Shepard模型在约鲁巴族胎儿中是一个值得怀疑的出生体重预测因子。当需要绝对出生体重值时,Hadlock IV算法优先用于疑似正常和低体重婴儿,而Campbell模型优先用于约鲁巴胎儿中体重>4公斤的胎儿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity of sonographic prediction of birth weight: A study of three algorithms in a cohort of healthy pregnant women of Yoruba descent in a suburb of Lagos state, Southwest Nigeria
Background: Accurate estimation of fetal birth weight is critical in determining the delivery route and management of the neonate. Purpose of Study: The purpose is to determine the accuracy of Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithm as predictors of birth weight in a cohort of fetuses of Yoruba descent. Materials and Methods: Fetal weight (FW) was estimated in a sample of 384 fetuses using Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithm while actual birth weight (ABW) was measured. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted and used to determine the accuracy and sensitivity of each algorithm. Results: Most babies (84.6%) had normal estimated fetal weight (EFW) and ABW; mean FW = 3.2 ± 0.5 kg); 10% had low weight while 5.5% were macrosomic. While EFW correlated positively and strongly with ABW, the Hadlock IV algorithm had the strongest correlation (r = 0.978). The Hadlock IV, Campbell, and Shepard's algorithms had 92%, 72%, and 56% accuracy within the tenth centile, respectively. At 95% confidence interval, Hadlock IV was the most accurate predictor of normal birth and low birth weight (area under the curve [AUC] =0.91 and 0.94, respectively). Campbell was the most accurate predictor of macrosomia (AUC = 0.89). Conclusion: While Hadlock IV and Campbell algorithm are valid predictors, the Shepard model is a doubtful birth weight predictor among fetuses of Yoruba origin. When there is a need for absolute birth weight values, the Hadlock IV algorithm is preferred for suspected normal and low-weight babies while the Campbell model is preferred for fetuses weighing >4 kg among Yoruba fetuses.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
West African Journal of Radiology
West African Journal of Radiology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信