Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 434

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adult Functional Outcome of Those Born Small for Gestational Age: Twenty-six–Year Follow-up of the 1970 British Birth Cohort

Strauss, Richard S.·2000·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Although studies have documented cognitive impairment in children who were born small for gestational age (SGA), other studies have not demonstrated differences in IQ or other cognitive scores. The need exists for long-term studies of such children to assess functional outcomes not measurable with standardized testing. OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term functional outcome of SGA infants. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 14,189 full-term infants born in the United Kingdom on April 5 through 11, 1970, were studied as part of the 1970 British Birth Cohort; 1064 were SGA (birth weight less than the fifth percentile for age at term). Follow-up at 5, 10, 16, and 26 years was 93%, 80%, 72%, and 53%, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: School performance and achievement, assessed at 5, 10, and 16 years; and years of education, occupational status, income, marital status, life satisfaction, disability, and height, assessed at 26 years, comparing persons born SGA with those who were not. RESULTS: At 5, 10, and 16 years of age, those born SGA demonstrated small but significant deficits in academic achievement. In addition, teachers were less likely to rate those born SGA in the top 15th percentile of the class at 16 years (13% vs 20%; P<.01) and more likely to recommend special education (4.9% vs 2.3%; P<.01) compared with those born at normal birth weight (NBW). At age 26 years, adults who were SGA did not demonstrate any differences in years of education, employment, hours of work per week, marital status, or satisfaction with life. However, adults who were SGA were less likely to have professional or managerial jobs (8.7% vs 16.4%; P<.01) and reported significantly lower levels of weekly income (mean [SD], 185 [91] vs 206 [102] pound sterling; P<.01) than adults who were NBW. Adults who were SGA also reported significant height deficits compared with those who were NBW (mean [SD] z score, -0.55 [0.98] vs 0.08 [1.02]; P<.001). Similar results were also obtained after adjusting for social class, sex, region of birth, and the presence of fetal or neonatal distress. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, adults who were born SGA had significant differences in academic achievement and professional attainment compared with adults who were NBW. However, there were no long-term social or emotional consequences of being SGA: these adults were as likely to be employed, married, and satisfied with life.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.283.5.625

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 434

Metadata

Authors
Strauss, R. S.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2000-02-02
Volume
283
Issue
5
Pages
625
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2083327844
Cited by
434
References
1
FWCI
17.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adult Functional Outcome of Those Born Small for Gestational Age: Twenty-six–Year Follow-up of the 1970 British Birth Cohort. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.283.5.625
The paper
Strauss, R. S. (2000). Adult Functional Outcome of Those Born Small for Gestational Age: Twenty-six–Year Follow-up of the 1970 British Birth Cohort. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.5.625

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.