Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: (IG21). METHOD: Retrospective analysis of data from the Brazilian Neonatal Research Network (BNRN) database for very low birth weight (VLBW) at 20 public tertiary-care university hospitals. OUTCOME: percentile of BMI. Single and multiple log-binomial regression models were fitted to estimate the relative risks of CNMM, comparing them to IG21. RESULTS: 4,072 infants were included. The adjusted relative risks of CNMM associated with selected growth phenotypes were (BNRN/IG21): 1.45 (0.92-2.31)/1.60 (1.27-2.02) for SGA; 0.90 (0.55-1.47)/1.05 (0.55-1.99) for LGA; 1.65 (1.08-2.51)/1.58 (1.28-1.96) for stunting; and 1.48 (1.02-2.17) for wasting. Agreement between the two references was variable. The growth phenotypes had good specificity (>95%) and positive predictive value (70-90%), with poor sensitivity and low negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: The BNRN phenotypes at birth differed markedly from the IG21 standard and showed poor accuracy in predicting adverse neonatal outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cardoso et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: