Reference tools based on birth weight percentiles at a given gestational week have long been used to define fetuses or infants that are small or large for their gestational ages. However, important deficiencies of the birth weight reference are being increasingly recognized. Overwhelming evidence indicates that an ultrasonography-based fetal weight reference should be used to classify fetal and newborn sizes during pregnancy and at birth, respectively. Questions have been raised as to whether further adjustments for race/ethnicity, parity, sex, and maternal height and weight are helpful to improve the accuracy of the classification. In this issue of the Journal, Carberry et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(8):1301-1308) show that adjustment for race/ethnicity is useful, but that additional fine tuning for other factors (i.e., full customization) in the classification may not further improve the ability to predict infant morbidity, mortality, and other fetal growth indicators. Thus, the theoretical advantage of full customization may have limited incremental value for pediatric outcomes, particularly in term births. Literature on the prediction of short-term maternal outcomes and very long-term outcomes (adult diseases) is too scarce to draw any conclusions. Given that each additional variable being incorporated in the classification scheme increases complexity and costs in practice, the clinical utility of full customization in obstetric practice requires further testing.
Keywords: birth weight; customization; fetal growth; large for gestational age; small for gestational age.