Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/158795 |
Resumo: | Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated to increased rates of large for gestational age (LGA) newborns and macrosomia. Several charts are used to classify birth weight. Is there an ideal chart to classify newborns of GDM mothers? Methods: We evaluated adequacy of birth weight of 332 neonates born to GDM mothers at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil. Newborns were classified according to gestational age as small (SGA), adequate, or large (LGA) based on four charts: Alexander, Pedreira, INTERGROWTH 21st Project, and SINASC-2012. The latter was built using data from a large national registry of 2012, the Born Alive National Surveillance System (Sistema de Informações de Nascidos Vivos – SINASC), which included 2,905.789 birth certificates. Frequencies of SGA and LGA and Kappa agreement were calculated. Results: In non-gender adjusted curves, SGA rates (95% confidence interval) varied from 8% (5-11) to 9% (6-13); LGA rates, from 11% (8-15) to 17% (13-21). For males, SGA rates varied from 3% (1-6%) to 6% (3-11%), and LGA rates, from 18% (13-24%) to 31% (24-38%); for females, SGA rates were from 3% (1-7%) to 10% (6-16%) and LGA rates, from 11% (6-16%) to 19% (13-26%). Kappa results were: ALEXANDER vs. SINASC-2012: 0.80 (0.73-0.88); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. SINASC-2012 (adjusted by sex): 0.62 (0.53-0.71); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. PEDREIRA: 0.71 (0.62-0.79); SINASC-2012 (by sex) vs. PEDREIRA: 0.86 (0.79-0.93). Conclusions: Misclassification has to be taken into account when evaluating newborns of GDM mothers, as LGA rates can almost double depending on the chart used to classify birth weight. |
id |
UFRGS-2_fd88e620955c4a1facaefd7871046f46 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/158795 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRGS-2 |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Mastella, Lívia SilveiraWeinert, Letícia SchwerzGnielka, VanessaHirakata, Vania NaomiOppermann, Maria Lúcia RochaSilveiro, Sandra PinhoReichelt, Angela de Azevedo Jacob2017-05-30T02:38:02Z20162357-9730http://hdl.handle.net/10183/158795001012760Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated to increased rates of large for gestational age (LGA) newborns and macrosomia. Several charts are used to classify birth weight. Is there an ideal chart to classify newborns of GDM mothers? Methods: We evaluated adequacy of birth weight of 332 neonates born to GDM mothers at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil. Newborns were classified according to gestational age as small (SGA), adequate, or large (LGA) based on four charts: Alexander, Pedreira, INTERGROWTH 21st Project, and SINASC-2012. The latter was built using data from a large national registry of 2012, the Born Alive National Surveillance System (Sistema de Informações de Nascidos Vivos – SINASC), which included 2,905.789 birth certificates. Frequencies of SGA and LGA and Kappa agreement were calculated. Results: In non-gender adjusted curves, SGA rates (95% confidence interval) varied from 8% (5-11) to 9% (6-13); LGA rates, from 11% (8-15) to 17% (13-21). For males, SGA rates varied from 3% (1-6%) to 6% (3-11%), and LGA rates, from 18% (13-24%) to 31% (24-38%); for females, SGA rates were from 3% (1-7%) to 10% (6-16%) and LGA rates, from 11% (6-16%) to 19% (13-26%). Kappa results were: ALEXANDER vs. SINASC-2012: 0.80 (0.73-0.88); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. SINASC-2012 (adjusted by sex): 0.62 (0.53-0.71); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. PEDREIRA: 0.71 (0.62-0.79); SINASC-2012 (by sex) vs. PEDREIRA: 0.86 (0.79-0.93). Conclusions: Misclassification has to be taken into account when evaluating newborns of GDM mothers, as LGA rates can almost double depending on the chart used to classify birth weight.application/pdfengClinical and biomedical research. Porto Alegre. Vol. 36, n. 4, (2016), p. 192-198Diabetes gestacionalPeso ao nascerIdade gestacionalGráficosGestational diabetesBirth weight chartsLarge for gestational age newbornSmall for gestational age newbornBirth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart?info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSORIGINAL001012760.pdf001012760.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf883780http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/158795/1/001012760.pdfdfd790cabafa7f4daf2bb646046a0abcMD51TEXT001012760.pdf.txt001012760.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain30418http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/158795/2/001012760.pdf.txt7b61efe069dad3b9532d1903c6b1d7b3MD5210183/1587952023-05-19 04:00:03.895446oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/158795Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2023-05-19T07:00:03Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
title |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
spellingShingle |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? Mastella, Lívia Silveira Diabetes gestacional Peso ao nascer Idade gestacional Gráficos Gestational diabetes Birth weight charts Large for gestational age newborn Small for gestational age newborn |
title_short |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
title_full |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
title_fullStr |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
title_sort |
Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes : is there an ideal chart? |
author |
Mastella, Lívia Silveira |
author_facet |
Mastella, Lívia Silveira Weinert, Letícia Schwerz Gnielka, Vanessa Hirakata, Vania Naomi Oppermann, Maria Lúcia Rocha Silveiro, Sandra Pinho Reichelt, Angela de Azevedo Jacob |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Weinert, Letícia Schwerz Gnielka, Vanessa Hirakata, Vania Naomi Oppermann, Maria Lúcia Rocha Silveiro, Sandra Pinho Reichelt, Angela de Azevedo Jacob |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Mastella, Lívia Silveira Weinert, Letícia Schwerz Gnielka, Vanessa Hirakata, Vania Naomi Oppermann, Maria Lúcia Rocha Silveiro, Sandra Pinho Reichelt, Angela de Azevedo Jacob |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Diabetes gestacional Peso ao nascer Idade gestacional Gráficos |
topic |
Diabetes gestacional Peso ao nascer Idade gestacional Gráficos Gestational diabetes Birth weight charts Large for gestational age newborn Small for gestational age newborn |
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv |
Gestational diabetes Birth weight charts Large for gestational age newborn Small for gestational age newborn |
description |
Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated to increased rates of large for gestational age (LGA) newborns and macrosomia. Several charts are used to classify birth weight. Is there an ideal chart to classify newborns of GDM mothers? Methods: We evaluated adequacy of birth weight of 332 neonates born to GDM mothers at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil. Newborns were classified according to gestational age as small (SGA), adequate, or large (LGA) based on four charts: Alexander, Pedreira, INTERGROWTH 21st Project, and SINASC-2012. The latter was built using data from a large national registry of 2012, the Born Alive National Surveillance System (Sistema de Informações de Nascidos Vivos – SINASC), which included 2,905.789 birth certificates. Frequencies of SGA and LGA and Kappa agreement were calculated. Results: In non-gender adjusted curves, SGA rates (95% confidence interval) varied from 8% (5-11) to 9% (6-13); LGA rates, from 11% (8-15) to 17% (13-21). For males, SGA rates varied from 3% (1-6%) to 6% (3-11%), and LGA rates, from 18% (13-24%) to 31% (24-38%); for females, SGA rates were from 3% (1-7%) to 10% (6-16%) and LGA rates, from 11% (6-16%) to 19% (13-26%). Kappa results were: ALEXANDER vs. SINASC-2012: 0.80 (0.73-0.88); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. SINASC-2012 (adjusted by sex): 0.62 (0.53-0.71); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. PEDREIRA: 0.71 (0.62-0.79); SINASC-2012 (by sex) vs. PEDREIRA: 0.86 (0.79-0.93). Conclusions: Misclassification has to be taken into account when evaluating newborns of GDM mothers, as LGA rates can almost double depending on the chart used to classify birth weight. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2016 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2017-05-30T02:38:02Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/other |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/158795 |
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
2357-9730 |
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
001012760 |
identifier_str_mv |
2357-9730 001012760 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/158795 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Clinical and biomedical research. Porto Alegre. Vol. 36, n. 4, (2016), p. 192-198 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) instacron:UFRGS |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
instacron_str |
UFRGS |
institution |
UFRGS |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/158795/1/001012760.pdf http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/158795/2/001012760.pdf.txt |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
dfd790cabafa7f4daf2bb646046a0abc 7b61efe069dad3b9532d1903c6b1d7b3 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1815447631269199872 |