Suppr超能文献

妊娠体重增加预测巨大儿和低出生体重:系统评价。

Gestational weight gain as a predictor of macrosomia and low birth weight: a systematic review.

机构信息

Instituto Nacional de Salud, Lima, Perú.

出版信息

Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica. 2020 Dec 2;37(3):403-411. doi: 10.17843/rpmesp.2020.373.4919.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the predictive capacity of gestational weight gain recommendations regarding low birth weight (LBW) and neonatal macrosomia, proposed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the Latin American Center of Perinatology (CLAP).

MATE RIALS AND METHODS

The bibliographic search was performed in PubMed, Embase (via Ovid), Cochrane Library, EBSCOhost, Sco pus, LILACS and SciELO. Methodological quality was evaluated using QUADAS 2.

RESULTS

A total of 1,192 articles were identified, only 5 articles met the inclusion criteria, no study evluated the CLAP recomendations. Sensitivity and specificity to predict LBW and macrosomia varied widely depending on which country the study took place. In the Latin American cohorts, the sensitivity for predicting LBW ranged from 62.8% to 74% and the specificity from 61.7% to 68%, while the sensitivity for predicting macrosomia was 28.8% and the specificity 43.8%. In most studies the positive predictive value was less than 25%, and the negative predictive va lue was more than 90%. Most studies had high risk of bias and applicability problems in patient selection.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited methodological quality and representativeness of the studied cohorts, probable unadjusted confounding factors and modest values of sensitivity and specificity suggest the need to develop studies aimed at providing recommendations that fit the epidemiological characteristics of the Peruvian population.

摘要

目的

评估美国医学研究所(IOM)和拉丁美洲围产医学中心(CLAP)提出的关于低出生体重(LBW)和巨大儿的孕期体重增加建议的预测能力。

材料和方法

在 PubMed、Embase(通过 Ovid)、Cochrane 图书馆、EBSCOhost、Scopus、LILACS 和 SciELO 中进行文献检索。使用 QUADAS 2 评估方法学质量。

结果

共确定了 1192 篇文章,只有 5 篇文章符合纳入标准,没有研究评估 CLAP 建议。预测 LBW 和巨大儿的敏感性和特异性因研究所在国家/地区而异。在拉丁美洲队列中,预测 LBW 的敏感性范围为 62.8%至 74%,特异性为 61.7%至 68%,而预测巨大儿的敏感性为 28.8%,特异性为 43.8%。在大多数研究中,阳性预测值均低于 25%,阴性预测值均高于 90%。大多数研究在患者选择方面存在偏倚风险高和适用性问题。

结论

研究队列的方法学质量和代表性有限、可能存在未经调整的混杂因素以及敏感性和特异性的适度值表明,有必要开展旨在提供适合秘鲁人群流行病学特征的建议的研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验