{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]],"date-time":"2026-06-04T13:57:43Z","timestamp":1780581463981,"version":"3.54.1"},"reference-count":50,"publisher":"MDPI AG","issue":"13","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,3]],"date-time":"2021-07-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1625270400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100010198","name":"Ministerio de Econom\u00eda, Industria y Competitividad, Gobierno de Espa\u00f1a","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["MTM2017-83812-P"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["MTM2017-83812-P"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100010198","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["JCM"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infants have been associated with increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes (APOs). In this work, we assess the predictive ability of the ultrasound-estimated percentile weight (EPW) at 35 weeks of gestational age to predict late-onset SGA and APOs, according to six growth standards, and whether the ultrasound\u2013delivery interval influences the detection rate. To this purpose, we analyze a retrospective cohort study of 9585 singleton pregnancies. EPWs at 35 weeks were calculated to the customized Miguel Servet University Hospital (MSUH) and Figueras standards and the non-customized MSUH, Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF), INTERGROWTH-21st, and WHO standards. As results of our analysis, for a 10% false positive rate, the detection rates for SGA ranged between 48.9% with the customized Figueras standard (AUC 0.82) and 60.8% with the non-customized FMF standard (AUC 0.87). Detection rates to predict SGA by ultrasound\u2013delivery interval (1\u20136 weeks) show higher detection rates as intervals decrease. APOs detection rates ranged from 27.0% with FMF to 7.9% with the Figueras standard. In conclusion, the ability of EPW to predict SGA at 35 weeks is good for all standards, and slightly better for non-customized standards. The APO detection rate is significantly greater for non-customized standards.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm10132984","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,4]],"date-time":"2021-07-04T22:34:36Z","timestamp":1625438076000},"page":"2984","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/mdpi_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":12,"title":["Prediction of Late-Onset Small for Gestational Age and Fetal Growth Restriction by Fetal Biometry at 35 Weeks and Impact of Ultrasound\u2013Delivery Interval: Comparison of Six Fetal Growth Standards"],"prefix":"10.3390","volume":"10","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-9585-0187","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ricardo","family":"Savir\u00f3n-Cornudella","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Cl\u00ednico San Carlos and Instituto de Investigaci\u00f3n Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Calle del Prof Mart\u00edn Lagos s\/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3007-302X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Luis Mariano","family":"Esteban","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Applied Mathematics, Escuela Universitaria Polit\u00e9cnica de La Almunia, Universidad de Zaragoza, Calle Mayor 5, 50100 La Almunia de Do\u00f1a Godina, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-1415-146X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Roc\u00edo","family":"Aznar-Gimeno","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Big Data and Cognitive Systems, Instituto Tecnol\u00f3gico de Aragon, ITAINNOVA, Mar\u00eda de Luna 7-8, 50018 Zaragoza, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Pe\u00f1a","family":"Dieste-P\u00e9rez","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Health Research Institute (IISA), Miguel Servet University Hospital and Aragon, Isabel La Cat\u00f3lica 3, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-2801-416X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Faustino R.","family":"P\u00e9rez-L\u00f3pez","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Instituto de Investigaci\u00f3n Sanitaria Arag\u00f3n, University of Zaragoza, Domingo Miral s\/n, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-0306-8858","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Jose Manuel","family":"Campillos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Health Research Institute (IISA), Miguel Servet University Hospital and Aragon, Isabel La Cat\u00f3lica 3, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Berta","family":"Cast\u00e1n-Larraz","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Pedro Hospital, Calle Piqueras 98, 26006 Logro\u00f1o, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-6474-2252","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Gerardo","family":"Sanz","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Statistical Methods and Institute for Biocomputation and Physics of Complex Systems-BIFI, University of Zaragoza, Calle Pedro Cerbuna 12, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Mauricio","family":"Tajada-Duaso","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Miguel Servet University Hospital, Isabel La Cat\u00f3lica 3, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"1968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"892","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000282758.28533.d9","article-title":"Clinician bias in fundal height measurement","volume":"110","author":"Jelks","year":"2007","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"284","DOI":"10.1097\/00003081-200606000-00010","article-title":"Screening for fetal growth restriction","volume":"49","author":"Chauhan","year":"2006","journal-title":"Clin. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"681","DOI":"10.1111\/1471-0528.12172","article-title":"Novel biomarkers for predicting intrauterine growth restriction: A systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"120","author":"Papageorghiou","year":"2013","journal-title":"BJOG"},{"key":"ref_4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"364","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.15979","article-title":"Prediction of delivery of small-for-gestational age neonates and adverse perinatal outcome by fetoplacental Doppler at 37 weeks' gestation","volume":"49","author":"Triunfo","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S855","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.12.004","article-title":"Evidence-based national guidelines for the management of suspected fetal growth restriction: Comparison, consensus, and controversy","volume":"218","author":"McCowan","year":"2018","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"698","DOI":"10.1016\/j.puhe.2014.06.022","article-title":"Preventing stillbirths through improved antenatal recognition of pregnancies at risk due to fetal growth restriction","volume":"128","author":"Gardosi","year":"2014","journal-title":"Public Health"},{"key":"ref_7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"f108","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.f108","article-title":"Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: Population based study","volume":"346","author":"Gardosi","year":"2013","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"ref_8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"595","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.13333","article-title":"Identification of pathologically small fetuses using customized, ultrasound and population-based growth norms","volume":"44","author":"Smith","year":"2014","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1106","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(03)14466-2","article-title":"Surveillance of Cerebral Palsy in Europe (SCPE) collaboration of European Cerebral Palsy Registers. Cerebral palsy and intrauterine growth in single births: European collaborative study","volume":"362","author":"Jarvis","year":"2003","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref_10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"397","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bpobgyn.2004.02.009","article-title":"Perinatal mortality and fetal growth restriction","volume":"18","author":"Kady","year":"2004","journal-title":"Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol."},{"key":"ref_11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"162","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.14644","article-title":"Human fetal growth is constrained below optimal for perinatal survival","volume":"45","author":"Vasak","year":"2015","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"258","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.1806","article-title":"Does antenatal identification of small-for-gestational age fetuses significantly improve their outcome?","volume":"25","author":"Lindqvist","year":"2005","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S738","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.11.563","article-title":"The effect of customization and use of a fetal growth standard on the association between birthweight percentile and adverse perinatal outcome","volume":"218","author":"Sovio","year":"2018","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"449","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.09.043","article-title":"Diagnostic performance of third-trimester ultrasound for the prediction of late-onset fetal growth restriction: A systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"220","author":"Caradeux","year":"2019","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"20","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2006.12.015","article-title":"Customized birthweight standards for a Spanish population","volume":"136","author":"Figueras","year":"2008","journal-title":"Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol."},{"key":"ref_16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"750","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2016-0298","article-title":"Comparison of fetal weight distribution improved by paternal height by Spanish standard versus Intergrowth 21st standard","volume":"46","author":"Esteban","year":"2018","journal-title":"J. Perinat. Med."},{"key":"ref_17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kiserud, T., Piaggio, G., Carroli, G., Widmer, M., Carvalho, J., Neerup Jensen, L., Giordano, D., Cecatti, J.G., Abdel Aleem, H., and Talegawkar, S.A. (2017). The World Health Organization Fetal Growth Charts: A Multinational Longitudinal Study of Ultrasound Biometric Measurements and Estimated Fetal Weight. PLoS Med., 14.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1002284"},{"key":"ref_18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"129","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.181.1.1887021","article-title":"In utero analysis of fetal growth: A sonographic weight standard","volume":"181","author":"Hadlock","year":"1991","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"ref_19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"333","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(85)90298-4","article-title":"Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements: A prospective study","volume":"151","author":"Hadlock","year":"1985","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"478","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.17347","article-title":"International estimated fetal weight standards of the INTERGROWTH-21st project","volume":"49","author":"Stirnemann","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"857","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(14)60932-6","article-title":"International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: The newborn cross-sectional study of the INTERGROWTH-21st project","volume":"384","author":"Villar","year":"2014","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref_22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.19073","article-title":"Fetal Medicine Foundation fetal and neonatal population weight charts","volume":"52","author":"Nicolaides","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"283","DOI":"10.1016\/0140-6736(92)91342-6","article-title":"Customised antenatal growth charts","volume":"339","author":"Gardosi","year":"1992","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref_24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"309","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08267.x","article-title":"Controlled trial of fundal height measurement plotted on customized antenatal growth charts","volume":"106","author":"Gardosi","year":"1999","journal-title":"Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol."},{"key":"ref_25","unstructured":"The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2013). Small-for-Gestational-Age Fetus, Investigation and Management (Green-top Guideline No. 31), The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. [2nd ed.]."},{"key":"ref_26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"104","DOI":"10.1159\/000500453","article-title":"Detection of Adverse Perinatal Outcomes at Term Delivery Using Ultrasound Estimated Percentile Weight at 35 Weeks of Gestation: Comparison of Five Fetal Growth Standards","volume":"47","author":"Esteban","year":"2020","journal-title":"Fetal Diagn. Ther."},{"key":"ref_27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.20299","article-title":"Prediction of adverse perinatal outcomes by fetal biometry: A comparison of customized and population-based standards","volume":"55","author":"Kabiri","year":"2020","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"11","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-3016.2010.01155.x","article-title":"The case against customised birthweight standards","volume":"25","author":"Hutcheon","year":"2011","journal-title":"Pediatric Perinat. Epidemiol."},{"key":"ref_29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3507","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.8018","article-title":"Statistical methodology for constructing gestational age-related charts using cross-sectional and longitudinal data: THE INTERGROWTH-21st Project as a case study","volume":"38","author":"Ohuma","year":"2019","journal-title":"Stat. Med."},{"key":"ref_30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Committee on Obstetric Practice and American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (2017). Committee Opinion No 700: Methods for Estimating the Due Date. Obstet. Gynecol., 129, e150\u2013e154.","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000002046"},{"key":"ref_31","first-page":"59","article-title":"Estudios espa\u00f1oles de crecimiento 2010","volume":"2","author":"Carrascosa","year":"2011","journal-title":"Rev. Esp. Endocrinol. Pediatric"},{"key":"ref_32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"29","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.143.1.7063747","article-title":"The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve","volume":"143","author":"Hanley","year":"1982","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"ref_33","unstructured":"R Core Team (2014). R: A Languaje and Environment for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available online: http:\/\/www.R-project.org."},{"key":"ref_34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1159\/000510020","article-title":"Prediction of Large for Gestational Age by Ultrasound at 35 Weeks and Impact of Ultrasound-Delivery Interval: Comparison of 6 Standards","volume":"48","author":"Esteban","year":"2021","journal-title":"Fetal Diagn. Ther."},{"key":"ref_35","unstructured":"National Collaborating Centre for Women\u2019s and Children\u2019s Health (NCC-WCH) on behalf of the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2008). Antenatal Care (NICE Clinical Guideline 62), National Institute of Health and Care Excellence."},{"key":"ref_36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2009). ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 101: Ultrasonography in pregnancy. Obstet. Gynecol., 113, 451\u2013461.","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31819930b0"},{"key":"ref_37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2089","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(15)00131-2","article-title":"Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: A prospective cohort study","volume":"386","author":"Sovio","year":"2015","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref_38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"603","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.17393","article-title":"Prediction of fetal growth restriction using estimated fetal weight vs a combined screening model in the third trimester","volume":"50","author":"Miranda","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"559","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.14816","article-title":"Prediction of small for gestational age neonates: Screening by fetal biometry at 35\u201337 weeks","volume":"45","author":"Fadigas","year":"2015","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_40","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"80","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.1751","article-title":"A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight","volume":"25","author":"Dudley","year":"2005","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_41","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"159","DOI":"10.1097\/00006254-200103000-00023","article-title":"Fetal biometry: Clinical, pathological, and technical considerations","volume":"56","author":"Degani","year":"2001","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol. Surv."},{"key":"ref_42","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"442","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.7605","article-title":"Incorporation of femur length leads to underestimation of fetal weight in asymmetric preterm growth restriction","volume":"35","author":"Proctor","year":"2010","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_43","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"915","DOI":"10.1002\/pd.4161","article-title":"Performance of the ultrasound examination in the early and late third trimester for the prediction of birth weight deviations","volume":"33","author":"Souka","year":"2013","journal-title":"Prenat. Diagn."},{"key":"ref_44","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"391","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.14915","article-title":"Ultrasound screening for fetal growth restriction at 36 vs 32 weeks' gestation: A randomized trial (ROUTE)","volume":"46","author":"Roma","year":"2015","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_45","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"835","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000002564","article-title":"A Comparison of Methods for the Diagnosis of Fetal Growth Restriction Between the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists","volume":"131","author":"Blue","year":"2018","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_46","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"587","DOI":"10.1002\/jum.14725","article-title":"The Hadlock Method Is Superior to Newer Methods for the Prediction of the Birth Weight Percentile","volume":"38","author":"Blue","year":"2019","journal-title":"J. Ultrasound Med."},{"key":"ref_47","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1381","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.13394","article-title":"Customized fetal growth standard compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st century standard at predicting small-for-gestational-age neonates","volume":"97","author":"Odibo","year":"2018","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"ref_48","first-page":"1","article-title":"Comparing INTERGROWTH-21st Century and Hadlock growth standards to predict small for gestational age and short-term neonatal outcomes","volume":"6","author":"Nwabuobi","year":"2019","journal-title":"J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med."},{"key":"ref_49","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"372","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.15959","article-title":"Prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonate by third-trimester fetal biometry and impact of ultrasound-delivery interval","volume":"49","author":"Reboul","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_50","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"477","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.02.013","article-title":"The systematic error in the estimation of fetal weight and the underestimation of fetal growth restriction","volume":"216","author":"Lappen","year":"2017","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."}],"container-title":["Journal of Clinical Medicine"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/2077-0383\/10\/13\/2984\/pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,11]],"date-time":"2025-10-11T06:25:40Z","timestamp":1760163940000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/2077-0383\/10\/13\/2984"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,3]]},"references-count":50,"journal-issue":{"issue":"13","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,7]]}},"alternative-id":["jcm10132984"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/jcm10132984","relation":{},"ISSN":["2077-0383"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2077-0383","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,3]]}}}