{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,30]],"date-time":"2026-09-30T11:03:29Z","timestamp":1790766209986,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":45,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]],"date-time":"2026-06-04T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1780531200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]],"date-time":"2026-06-04T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1780531200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/doi.wiley.com\/10.1002\/tdm_license_1.1"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Pregnancy"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,7]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate which of 10 standards or references should be used for determination of percentiles of estimated fetal weight (EFW).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Study design<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Cross\u2010sectional study using pooled data from four maternal\u2010fetal medicine (MFM) practices. Inclusion criteria were as follows: ultrasound exam during 2022, singleton fetus, gestational age 24\n                      <jats:sup>0\/7<\/jats:sup>\n                      to 39\n                      <jats:sup>6\/7<\/jats:sup>\n                      weeks, biometry measured, and fetal cardiac activity present. EFW was calculated using the three\u2010parameter formula of Hadlock et\u00a0al. We evaluated five American birth weight (BW) references and five fetal weight (FW) standards. The fit of each reference or standard to our EFW distribution was assessed by seven criteria: mean\n                      <jats:italic>z<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2010score close to 0, standard deviation (SD) of\n                      <jats:italic>z<\/jats:italic>\n                      close to 1, Kolmogorov\u2013Smirnov D\u2010statistic close to 0, close to 10% of EFWs\u00a0&lt;10th percentile, close to 10% of EFWs\u00a0&gt;\u00a090th percentile, and Youden J\u2010statistics close to 1 at the 10th and 90th percentiles.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      In 20,643 ultrasound exams, the formulas from the 1991 FW standard of Hadlock et\u00a0al.\u00a0had the best fit to our distribution of EFW (mean\n                      <jats:italic>z<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2010score 0.07, SD of\n                      <jats:italic>z<\/jats:italic>\n                      1.04, D\u2010statistic 0.036, J\u2010statistics 0.946 and 0.972 at 10th and 90th percentile, respectively). All five EFW standards had better fit than any of the BW references, primarily because the range of normal of the BW references was much larger than the normal range of observed EFWs, resulting in underdiagnosis of abnormal EFW (both EFW\u00a0&lt;10th percentile and EFW\u00a0&gt;90th percentile). The range of normal from the Hadlock table was larger than that from the Hadlock formulas and the observed range, resulting in fewer diagnoses of abnormal EFW. In the subgroup of patients at low risk for small for gestational age or large for gestational age, the Hadlock formulas still had the best fit to our EFW distribution.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Of the norms studied, the FW distribution from the Hadlock 1991 formulas had the best fit to our observed EFW distribution and are the most appropriate standard for determination of EFW percentiles in our US\u2010based MFM practices. All the FW standards had better fit to our data than any of the BW references, so EFW percentiles should be based on FW standards, especially the Hadlock standard, not BW references.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1002\/pmf2.70337","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]],"date-time":"2026-06-04T12:29:26Z","timestamp":1780576166000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Selection of standards for estimated fetal weight percentiles"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"2","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5571-9579","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"C. Andrew","family":"Combs","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Pediatrix Center for Research, Education, Quality and Safety, Pediatrix &amp; Obstetrix  Sunrise Florida USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Olaide Ashimi","family":"Balogun","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrix Maternal\u2010Fetal Medicine Specialists of Houston, part of Pediatrix &amp; Obstetrix  Houston Texas USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sushma","family":"Amara","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Eastside Maternal\u2010Fetal Medicine Specialists, part of Pediatrix &amp; Obstetrix  Bellevue Washington USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Zachary S.","family":"Bowman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Perinatal Associates of Sacramento, part of Pediatrix &amp; Obstetrix  Sacramento California USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Peter A.","family":"Combs","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Independent Statistical Consultant  San Francisco California USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_11_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/jum.16406"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.19066"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(85)90298-4"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1742271X17732807"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm13226895"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(76)90748-1"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_8_1","first-page":"624","article-title":"Fetal Growth and Perinatal Viability in California","volume":"59","author":"Williams R. L.","year":"1982","journal-title":"Obstetrics and Gynecology"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-70423-9"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_10_1","first-page":"636","article-title":"Estimated Fetal Weight in the Evaluation of Growth in Twin Gestations: A Prospective Longitudinal Study","volume":"69","author":"Yarkoni S.","year":"1987","journal-title":"Obstetrics and Gynecology"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.181.1.1887021"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/archpedi.1992.02160190084027"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1651-2227.1996.tb14164.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0029-7844(95)00386-X"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1520-6661(199605\/06)5:3<124::AID-MFM5>3.0.CO;2-O"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_16_1","first-page":"877","article-title":"Standard Values of Ultrasonographic Fetal Biometry","volume":"23","author":"Shinozuka N.","year":"1996","journal-title":"Journal of Medical Ultrasonics"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7863\/jum.1997.16.4.241"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(98)00052-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1469-0705.1998.11020110.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5694\/j.1326-5377.1999.tb127678.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0412.2000.079006440.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/00016340600569133"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.4019"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.6357"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.2009-0913"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(11)60364-4"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_27_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000345"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_28_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2015.08.032"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jgyn.2015.01.006"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_30_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1002220"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_31_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.17347"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_32_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2021.12.006"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_33_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2025.10.008"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_34_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/EDE.0000000000001275"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_35_1","first-page":"B2","article-title":"Society for Maternal\u2010Fetal Medicine Consult Series #52: Diagnosis and Management of Fetal Growth Restriction","volume":"223","author":"Society for Maternal\u2010Fetal Medicine (SMFM)","year":"2020","journal-title":"American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_36_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.1901"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_37_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.6439"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_38_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000002046"},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_11_39_1","first-page":"e2625","article-title":"Selection of Standards for Sonographic Fetal Head Circumference by Use of z\u2010Scores","volume":"41","author":"Combs C. A.","year":"2024","journal-title":"American Journal of Perinatology"},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_11_40_1","first-page":"e3147","article-title":"Selection of Standards for Sonographic Fetal Femur Length by Use of z\u2010Scores","volume":"41","author":"Combs C. A.","year":"2024","journal-title":"American Journal of Perinatology"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_41_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2025.03.032"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_42_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajogmf.2022.100732"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_43_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.08.011"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_44_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/jum.14725"},{"key":"e_1_2_11_45_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajogmf.2022.100599"},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_11_46_1","first-page":"e45","article-title":"Customized versus Population Growth Standards for Morbidity and Mortality Risk Stratification Using Ultrasonographic Fetal Growth Assessment at 22 to 29 Weeks' Gestation","volume":"38","author":"Blue N. R.","year":"2021","journal-title":"American Journal of Perinatology"}],"container-title":["Pregnancy"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/pmf2.70337","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1002\/pmf2.70337","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/pmf2.70337","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,30]],"date-time":"2026-09-30T10:22:21Z","timestamp":1790763741000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/pmf2.70337"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]]},"references-count":45,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,7]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/pmf2.70337"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/pmf2.70337","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["2997-9684","2997-9684"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2997-9684","type":"print"},{"value":"2997-9684","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2025-12-19","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-05-26","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-06-04","order":3,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}],"article-number":"e70337"}}