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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology 2016-04, Vol.32, p.69-76 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 76 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 69 |
container_title | Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD |
description | 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.09.001 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1775177626</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1521693415001625</els_id><sourcerecordid>1775177626</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-5ff51645a7710ac7bce69c548d10bb4447174141f78af073eb9b10e40c23a77e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtP3TAQha2qqFDan9Aqy24SPH7EhEWBovKQkFgU1pbjTO71bV7YTtH993V0L12w6WI0szhnjuYbQr4ALYBCebIp6mmsV9uhYBRkQauCUnhHjkBylkPF2ftlZpCXFReH5GMIG0o5r5j8QA5ZKSQXqjwiFz-cj-v8Bd1qHTO7Nj6GzAxN5vrerbwZYjaN09yZ6MYhnGWXmfUuOmu6zOMfhy-fyEFruoCf9_2YPF3_fLy6ze8fbu6uLu9zKxiNuWxbCSnVKAXUWFVbLCsrxWkDtK6FEAqUAAGtOjUtVRzrqgaKglrGkwf5Mfm22zv58XnGEHXvgsWuMwOOc9CglExVsjJJ5U5q_RiCx1ZP3vXGbzVQvcDTG72Hpxd4mlY6wUu-r_uIue6x-ed6pZUE5zsBpkPT8V4H63Cw2DiPNupmdP-N-P5mg-3csOD8jVsMm3H2Q6KoQQemqf61fHB5IMjkLpnkfwED5pbh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1775177626</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Birth-weight charts and immigrant populations: A critical review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD ; Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD ; Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD ; Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD ; Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1521-6934</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-1932</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.09.001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26453476</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Birth Weight ; Culturally Competent Care ; Developed Countries ; Developing Countries ; Emigrants and Immigrants ; ethnicity ; Gestational Age ; Growth Charts ; Humans ; inequalities ; Infant, Newborn ; Infant, Small for Gestational Age ; low birth weight ; Minority Groups ; newborn charts migration ; Obstetrics and Gynecology ; small for gestational age</subject><ispartof>Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology, 2016-04, Vol.32, p.69-76</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-5ff51645a7710ac7bce69c548d10bb4447174141f78af073eb9b10e40c23a77e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-5ff51645a7710ac7bce69c548d10bb4447174141f78af073eb9b10e40c23a77e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8289-8090</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.09.001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26453476$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Birth-weight charts and immigrant populations: A critical review</title><title>Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology</title><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Birth Weight</subject><subject>Culturally Competent Care</subject><subject>Developed Countries</subject><subject>Developing Countries</subject><subject>Emigrants and Immigrants</subject><subject>ethnicity</subject><subject>Gestational Age</subject><subject>Growth Charts</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>inequalities</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Infant, Small for Gestational Age</subject><subject>low birth weight</subject><subject>Minority Groups</subject><subject>newborn charts migration</subject><subject>Obstetrics and Gynecology</subject><subject>small for gestational age</subject><issn>1521-6934</issn><issn>1532-1932</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtP3TAQha2qqFDan9Aqy24SPH7EhEWBovKQkFgU1pbjTO71bV7YTtH993V0L12w6WI0szhnjuYbQr4ALYBCebIp6mmsV9uhYBRkQauCUnhHjkBylkPF2ftlZpCXFReH5GMIG0o5r5j8QA5ZKSQXqjwiFz-cj-v8Bd1qHTO7Nj6GzAxN5vrerbwZYjaN09yZ6MYhnGWXmfUuOmu6zOMfhy-fyEFruoCf9_2YPF3_fLy6ze8fbu6uLu9zKxiNuWxbCSnVKAXUWFVbLCsrxWkDtK6FEAqUAAGtOjUtVRzrqgaKglrGkwf5Mfm22zv58XnGEHXvgsWuMwOOc9CglExVsjJJ5U5q_RiCx1ZP3vXGbzVQvcDTG72Hpxd4mlY6wUu-r_uIue6x-ed6pZUE5zsBpkPT8V4H63Cw2DiPNupmdP-N-P5mg-3csOD8jVsMm3H2Q6KoQQemqf61fHB5IMjkLpnkfwED5pbh</recordid><startdate>20160401</startdate><enddate>20160401</enddate><creator>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD</creator><creator>Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8289-8090</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160401</creationdate><title>Birth-weight charts and immigrant populations: A critical review</title><author>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD ; Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD ; Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-5ff51645a7710ac7bce69c548d10bb4447174141f78af073eb9b10e40c23a77e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Birth Weight</topic><topic>Culturally Competent Care</topic><topic>Developed Countries</topic><topic>Developing Countries</topic><topic>Emigrants and Immigrants</topic><topic>ethnicity</topic><topic>Gestational Age</topic><topic>Growth Charts</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>inequalities</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Infant, Small for Gestational Age</topic><topic>low birth weight</topic><topic>Minority Groups</topic><topic>newborn charts migration</topic><topic>Obstetrics and Gynecology</topic><topic>small for gestational age</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Urquia, Marcelo L., PhD</au><au>Sørbye, Ingvil K., MD, PhD</au><au>Wanigaratne, Susitha, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Birth-weight charts and immigrant populations: A critical review</atitle><jtitle>Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology</jtitle><addtitle>Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol</addtitle><date>2016-04-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>32</volume><spage>69</spage><epage>76</epage><pages>69-76</pages><issn>1521-6934</issn><eissn>1532-1932</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>26453476</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.09.001</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8289-8090</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1521-6934 |
ispartof | Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology, 2016-04, Vol.32, p.69-76 |
issn | 1521-6934 1532-1932 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1775177626 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Birth Weight Culturally Competent Care Developed Countries Developing Countries Emigrants and Immigrants ethnicity Gestational Age Growth Charts Humans inequalities Infant, Newborn Infant, Small for Gestational Age low birth weight Minority Groups newborn charts migration Obstetrics and Gynecology small for gestational age |
title | Birth-weight charts and immigrant populations: A critical review |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T17%3A33%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Birth-weight%20charts%20and%20immigrant%20populations:%20A%20critical%20review&rft.jtitle=Best%20practice%20&%20research.%20Clinical%20obstetrics%20&%20gynaecology&rft.au=Urquia,%20Marcelo%20L.,%20PhD&rft.date=2016-04-01&rft.volume=32&rft.spage=69&rft.epage=76&rft.pages=69-76&rft.issn=1521-6934&rft.eissn=1532-1932&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.09.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1775177626%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1775177626&rft_id=info:pmid/26453476&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1521693415001625&rfr_iscdi=true |