Birth-weight charts and immigrant populations: A critical review

There is an increasing body of literature focusing on differences in newborn size between different population subgroups defined by racial, ethnic, and immigration status. The interpretation of these differences as pathological or as merely reflecting normal variability is not straightforward and ma...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology 2016-04, Vol.32, p.69-76
Hauptverfasser: Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD, Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD, Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:There is an increasing body of literature focusing on differences in newborn size between different population subgroups defined by racial, ethnic, and immigration status. The interpretation of these differences as pathological or as merely reflecting normal variability is not straightforward and may have consequences for the provision of obstetric and neonatal care to minority populations. In this review, we critically assess some methodological issues affecting the assessment of newborn size and their potential implications for minority populations. In particular, we discuss the pros and cons of different types of newborn birth-weight (BW) charts (i.e., single local population-based references, minority-specific references, and a single international standard) to determine abnormal newborn size, with emphasis on immigrant populations. We conclude that size alone is not enough to inform clinical decisions and that all newborn size charts should be used as screening tools, not as diagnostic tools. Parental minority status may be regarded as a marker and used to further inquire about individual risk factors, particularly among immigrants who may not have a complete medical history in the new country. Finally, we outline areas for further research and recommendations for clinical practice.
ISSN:1521-6934
1532-1932
DOI:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.09.001