Cited by 437Maternal and Neonatal HealthcarePrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions

Comparison of pregnancy dating by last menstrual period, ultrasound scanning, and their combination

Savitz, David A., Terry, James W., Dole, Nancy, Thorp, John M., Siega-Riz, Anna Maria, Herring, Amy H.·2002·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of algorithms for the assignment of gestational age with the use of the last menstrual period and early ultrasound information. Study design Gestational age estimates that are based on last menstrual period, ultrasound scanning, or their combination were compared among women who attended prenatal care clinics in central North Carolina (n = 3655) by an evaluation of digit preference in the last menstrual period dates and a comparison of mean gestational age, preterm and postterm categories with the use of kappa statistics, difference between actual and expected delivery date, and birth weight among subgroups with discrepant assignments. Results Last menstrual period reports show digit preference, assign gestation 2.8 days longer on average than ultrasound scanning, yield substantially more postterm births (12.1% vs 3.4%), and predict delivery among term births less accurately. Misclassification of births as postterm was more common in younger women, those of nonoptimal prepregnancy body weight, cigarette smokers, and women who reported last menstrual period using preferred dates of the month. Conclusion Last menstrual period estimates of the duration of gestation are subject to both random error and a systematic tendency to overstate the duration of gestation, most likely because of delayed ovulation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1067/mob.2002.127601

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When the algorithm using crown-rump length with a difference of more than 7 days from the last menstrual period was followed, the number of deliveries within one week from the estimated date was higher compared to that using the last menstrual period (57.1% vs. 48.1%).

    “Moreover, when the algorithm using the CRL measurement, with a difference of more than 7 days from the LMP, was followed, the number of deliveries within one week from the estimated date was higher compared to that using the LMP (57.1% vs. 48.1%) [22].”
  • Determination of gestational age by last menstrual period resulted in more post-term deliveries compared to crown-rump length when it differed from the last menstrual period by more than 7 days.

    “According to results from a study of 3655 women, determination of gestational age by the LMP resulted in more post-term deliveries compared to the CRL (when it differed from the LMP by more than 7 days) [22].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Savitz, D. A., Terry, J. W., Dole, N., Thorp, J. M., Siega-Riz, A. M., & Herring, A. H.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-12
Volume
187
Issue
6
Pages
1660-1666
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2083854981
Cited by
437
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 31
FWCI
11.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da009096-08)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U64/CCU 412273)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA09096)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD28684, R01HD028684)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Keywords
gestational age estimation, last menstrual period, ultrasound dating, digit preference, post-term birth, preterm birth, birth weight, delayed ovulation, cigarette smoking, prenatal care
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Body Weight, Female, Gestational Age, Humans, Menstruation, Pregnancy, Sensitivity and Specificity, Smoking, Time Factors, Ultrasonography, Prenatal

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