Skip Navigation

Journal of Tropical Pediatrics 1988 34(1):34-41; doi:10.1093/tropej/34.1.34
© 1988 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lechtig, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lechtig, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

research-article

Predicting Risk of Delivering Low Birthweight Babies: Which Indicator is Better?*

Aaron Lechtig

UNICEF-SBS Ed. Seguradoras, 13 andar, 70072-Brasilia, DF, Brazil

The purpose of this paper is to examine potential advantages and disadvantages of anthropometric indicators of high risk of delivering low birth weight babies (LBW ≤ 2.5 kg). Indicators and high risk limits selected for this analysis were: weight gain during pregnancy (equal or less than 16th percentile for gestational age equivalent to 8 kg at term); arm circumference (equal or less than 23.5 cm at any point in pregnancy); uterine height (equal or less than 10th percentile for gestational age); and weight gain expressed as percentage of standard weight for height (equal or less than 90 per cent at the beginning of pregnancy).

The results suggest that:

1. Arm circumference, independently of gestational age, has similar sensitivity and specificity as weight gain during pregnancy for gestational age. Uterine height and weight gain for standard height may perform a little better.

At the community level combinations of arm circumference either with uterine height or with weight for height (at health services level) would produce better results. Such a combination of measures would help to avoid four to five times more LBW babies for a given input of resources as compared with no use of risk indicators. Therefore, the hypothesis is proposed that this last combination of risk indicators is the best feasible option to use in poor, malnourished populations with high prevalence of LBW babies.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.