title: Determining gestational age for public health care users in Brazil: comparison of methods and algorithm creation.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  A valid, accurate method for determining gestational age (GA) is crucial in classifying early and late prematurity, and it is a relevant issue in perinatology. This study aimed at assessing the validity of different measures for approximating GA, and it provides an insight into the development of algorithms that can be adopted in places with similar characteristics to Brazil. A follow-up study was carried out in two cities in southeast Brazil. Participants were interviewed in the first trimester of pregnancy and in the postpartum period, with a final sample of 1483 participants after exclusions. The distribution of GA estimates at birth using ultrasound (US) at 21-28 weeks, US at 29+ weeks, last menstrual period (LMP), and the Capurro method were compared with GA estimates at birth using the reference US (at 7-20 weeks of gestation). Kappa, sensitivity, and specificity tests were calculated for preterm (<37 weeks of gestation) and post-term (>=42 weeks) birth rates. The difference in days in the GA estimates between the reference US and the LMP and between the reference US and the Capurro method were evaluated in terms of maternal and infant characteristics, respectively.
  
  
  RESULTS
  For prematurity, US at 21-28 weeks had the highest sensitivity (0.84) and the Capurro method the highest specificity (0.97). For postmaturity, US at 21-28 weeks and the Capurro method had a very high sensitivity (0.98). All methods of GA estimation had a very low specificity (≤0.50) for postmaturity. GA estimates at birth with the algorithm and the reference US produced very similar results, with a preterm birth rate of 12.5%.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In countries such as Brazil, where there is less accurate information about the LMP and lower coverage of early obstetric US examinations, we recommend the development of algorithms that enable the use of available information using methodological strategies to reduce the chance of errors with GA. Thus, this study calls into attention the care needed when comparing preterm birth rates of different localities if they are calculated using different methods.
authors: Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. ana.pep@gmail.com
authors: Ana Paula Esteves
authors: AP
authors: Pereira
authors: Marcos Augusto Bastos
authors: MA
authors: Dias
authors: Maria Helena
authors: MH
authors: Bastos
authors: Silvana Granado Nogueira
authors: SG
authors: da Gama
authors: Maria do Carmo
authors: Mdo C
authors: Leal
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D001938:Brazil; D005260:Female; D005865:Gestational Age; D006801:Humans; D011247:Pregnancy; D011634:Public Health
references: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981 Jan 15;139(2):173-7
references: 7457532
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Feb;97(2):189-94
references: 11165580
references: Pediatrics. 2010 Feb;125(2):e214-24
references: 20100760
references: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1997 Mar;56(3):251-6
references: 9127157
references: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Dec;187(6):1660-6
references: 12501080
references: J Pediatr. 1978 Jul;93(1):120-2
references: 650322
references: J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2005 Apr;14(3):248-52
references: 15857271
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Apr 14;(4):CD007058
references: 20393955
references: Ann Epidemiol. 2007 Jun;17(6):425-30
references: 17395481
references: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2008 Nov;22(6):587-96
references: 19000297
references: Am J Epidemiol. 1991 Mar 15;133(6):585-9
references: 2006645
references: Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998 Sep;105(9):933-6
references: 9763041
references: Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2011 Jan;33(1):49-57
references: 21625794
references: Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
references: 843571
references: Public Health Rep. 1995 Jul-Aug;110(4):395-402
references: 7638326
references: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007 Sep;21 Suppl 2:62-71
references: 17803619
references: Am J Epidemiol. 2010 Apr 1;171(7):826-36
references: 20185417
references: JAMA. 1988 Dec 9;260(22):3306-8
references: 3054193
references: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2000 Jul;14(3):263-7
references: 10949219
references: J Ultrasound Med. 1993 Nov;12(11):647-53
references: 8264016
references: Ghana Med J. 2010 Jun;44(2):47-51
references: 21327003
references: Midwifery. 2009 Jun;25(3):277-85
references: 17920737
references: Psychol Bull. 1968 Oct;70(4):213-20
references: 19673146
references: Am J Public Health. 1999 Feb;89(2):213-8
references: 9949752
references: Cad Saude Publica. 2011 Oct;27(10):1906-16
references: 22031195
references: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007 Sep;21 Suppl 2:86-96
references: 17803622
references: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jun;198(6):703.e1-5; discussion 703.e5-6
references: 18538160
references: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007 Sep;21 Suppl 2:72-8
references: 17803620
references: Lancet. 2011 May 28;377(9780):1863-76
references: 21561656