• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

用于超声估计胎儿体重以预测实际出生体重的十一种常用公式的比较。

Comparison of eleven commonly used formulae for sonographic estimation of fetal weight in prediction of actual birth weight.

作者信息

Plonka Magdalena, Bociaga Marta, Radon-Pokracka Malgorzata, Nowak Magdalena, Huras Hubert

机构信息

Jagiellonian Univeristy Collegium Medicum, Department of Obstertics and Perinatology, Cracow, Poland, Kopernika 23 Street, 31-501 Kraków, Poland.

出版信息

Ginekol Pol. 2020;91(1):17-23. doi: 10.5603/GP.2020.0005.

DOI:10.5603/GP.2020.0005
PMID:32039463
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study is to compare the accuracy of 11 formulas in predicting fetal weight.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study includes 1072 pregnant women of gestational age from 28 to 42 weeks, who gave birth between January and June 2017. Pregnant women were divided into five groups; group 1, where actual birth weight (ABW) was less than 2500 g, group 2, where ABW was between 2500-4000 g, group 3, where ABW was above 4000 g. Group 4 - newborns with birth weight under 10 percentile and group 5 - newborns with birth weight above 90 percentile. The accuracy of the estimated fetal weight (EFW) was assessed by calculating absolute percentage error (APE) and 'limits-of-agreement'. R Spearman correlation was utilized between EFW and ABW.

RESULTS

The most accurate formula for group 1 is Hadlock3 (MAPE = 7.04%), the narrowest limits of agreement has Combs - [mean (SD): 99.41 g (269.57 g)]. For group 2, the lowest MAPE (5.43%) has Ott, the narrowest limits of agreement belongs to Combs - [mean (SD): -101.36 g (275.88 g)] . For group 3 is Hadlock3 (MAPE = 5.79%), the narrowest limits of agreement has Hadlock5 [mean (SD): -637.32 g (209.59 g)]. For group 4 is Combs (MAPE = 7.72%), the narrowest limits of agreement has Combs [mean (SD): 195.77 g (264.97 g)]. For gr oup 5 is Warsof2 (MAPE = 7.06%), the narrowest limits of agreement has Campbell [mean (SD): 227.81 g (299.26 g)].

CONCLUSIONS

Median of absolute percentage error is the most useful parameter to predict birth weight. Each group of fetuses needs different formula to predict the most accurate weight.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较11种公式预测胎儿体重的准确性。

材料与方法

本研究纳入了1072例孕周为28至42周的孕妇,她们于2017年1月至6月分娩。孕妇被分为五组;第1组,实际出生体重(ABW)小于2500g;第2组,ABW在2500 - 4000g之间;第3组,ABW高于4000g。第4组 - 出生体重低于第10百分位数的新生儿,第5组 - 出生体重高于第90百分位数的新生儿。通过计算绝对百分比误差(APE)和“一致性界限”来评估估计胎儿体重(EFW)的准确性。EFW与ABW之间采用Spearman秩相关分析。

结果

第1组最准确的公式是Hadlock3(平均绝对百分比误差 = 7.04%),一致性界限最窄的是Combs - [均值(标准差):99.41g(269.57g)]。对于第2组,最低的平均绝对百分比误差(5.43%)是Ott,一致性界限最窄的是Combs - [均值(标准差): - 101.36g(275.88g)]。对于第3组是Hadlock3(平均绝对百分比误差 = 5.79%),一致性界限最窄的是Hadlock5 [均值(标准差): - 637.32g(209.59g)]。对于第4组是Combs(平均绝对百分比误差 = 7.72%),一致性界限最窄的是Combs [均值(标准差):195.77g(264.97g)]。对于第5组是Warsof2(平均绝对百分比误差 = 7.06%),一致性界限最窄的是Campbell [均值(标准差):227.81g(299.26g)]。

结论

绝对百分比误差中位数是预测出生体重最有用的参数。每组胎儿需要不同的公式来预测最准确的体重。

相似文献

1
Comparison of eleven commonly used formulae for sonographic estimation of fetal weight in prediction of actual birth weight.用于超声估计胎儿体重以预测实际出生体重的十一种常用公式的比较。
Ginekol Pol. 2020;91(1):17-23. doi: 10.5603/GP.2020.0005.
2
Finding the best formula to predict the fetal weight: comparison of 18 formulas.寻找预测胎儿体重的最佳公式:18种公式的比较
Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2015;80(2):78-84. doi: 10.1159/000365814. Epub 2015 Jul 10.
3
Accuracy and precision of sonographic fetal weight estimation in Sweden.瑞典超声胎儿体重估测的准确性和精确性。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2023 Jun;102(6):699-707. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14554. Epub 2023 Mar 25.
4
Fetal weight estimation in extreme macrosomia (≥ 4,500 g): comparison of 10 formulas.巨大儿(≥4500g)胎儿体重估计:10 种公式的比较。
Ultraschall Med. 2012 Dec;33(7):E62-E67. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1281833. Epub 2011 Dec 16.
5
Comparison of sonographic fetal weight estimation formulas in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes.比较经阴道超声预测未足月胎膜早破孕妇胎儿体重的公式。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Feb 19;21(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-03631-w.
6
Ultrasonographic weight estimation in large for gestational age fetuses: a comparison of 17 sonographic formulas and four models algorithms.超声估计大于胎龄胎儿体重:17种超声公式与4种模型算法的比较
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010 Jul;23(7):675-80. doi: 10.3109/14767050903410631.
7
Ultrasound estimation of birth weight in twin pregnancy: comparison of biometry algorithms in the STORK multiple pregnancy cohort.双胎妊娠中超声估计出生体重:STORK多胎妊娠队列中生物测量算法的比较
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Aug;44(2):210-20. doi: 10.1002/uog.13253. Epub 2014 Jul 9.
8
Predicting the fetal weight by ultrasonography for isolated polyhydramnios: Comparison of 14 formulas.超声预测单纯性羊水过多胎儿体重:14 种公式比较。
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2024 Sep;50(9):1522-1530. doi: 10.1111/jog.16025. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
9
Predictive value of a single early fetal weight estimate in normal pregnancies.正常妊娠中单次早期胎儿体重估计的预测价值。
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007 Feb;130(2):187-92. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.04.018. Epub 2006 May 23.
10
Third trimester ultrasound accuracy and delivery outcome in obese and morbid obese pregnant women.肥胖及病态肥胖孕妇孕晚期超声检查的准确性及分娩结局
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019 Apr;32(8):1275-1279. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1404566. Epub 2017 Nov 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Partial dependence of ultrasonically estimated fetal weight on biometric parameters.超声估计胎儿体重对生物测量参数的部分依赖性。
R Soc Open Sci. 2025 Jun 18;12(6):250172. doi: 10.1098/rsos.250172. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
A novel software for method comparison: MCS (method comparison software)-assessing agreement between estimated fetal weights calculated by Hadlock I-V formulas and birth weight.一种新的方法比较软件:MCS(方法比较软件)-评估 Hadlock I-V 公式估算的胎儿体重与出生体重之间的一致性。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Nov;310(5):2439-2452. doi: 10.1007/s00404-024-07680-2. Epub 2024 Aug 30.
3
Integrated growth assessment in the first 1000 d of life: an interdisciplinary conceptual framework.
生命最初 1000 天的综合生长评估:一个跨学科的概念框架。
Public Health Nutr. 2023 Aug;26(8):1523-1538. doi: 10.1017/S1368980023000940. Epub 2023 May 12.