Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 454

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 144 of the 144 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The macrosomic fetus: a challenge in current obstetrics

HENRIKSEN, TORE·2008·Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Abstract

Background. There has been a rise in the prevalence of large newborns over a few decades in many parts of the world. There is ample evidence that fetal macrosomia is associated with increased risk of complications both for the mother and the newborn. In current obstetrics, the macrosomic fetus represents a frequent clinical challenge. Evidence is emerging that being born macrosomic is also associated with future health risks. Objective. To provide a review of causes and risks, prevention, prediction and clinical management of suspected large fetus/fetal macrosomia, primarily aimed at clinical obstetricians. Methods. Medline and EMBASE were searched between 1980 and 2007 by combining either ‘fetal macrosomia’ or ‘large for gestational age’ with other relevant terms. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched for the term ‘fetal macrosomia’. Results and conclusions. Although the causes of high birthweight include both genetic and environmental factors, the rapid increase in the prevalence of large newborns has environmental causes. The evidence is extensive that maternal overweight and associated metabolic changes, including type 2 and gestational diabetes, play a central role. There is a paucity of studies of the effect of intervention before and/or during pregnancy on the risk of having an ‘overweight newborn’. It appears rational, however, that preventive measures should primarily be implemented before pregnancy and should include guidance about nutrition and physical activity in order to reduce the prevalence of overweight. In pregnancy, limited weight gain, especially in obese women, seems to reduce the risk of macrosomia, as do good control of plasma glucose among those with diabetes. Prediction of fetal macrosomia remains an inaccurate task even with modern ultrasound equipment. There is little evidence that routine elective delivery (induction or caesarean section) for the mere reason of suspected macrosomia should be employed in a general population. Vaginal delivery of a macrosomic fetus requires considered attention by an experienced obstetrician and preparedness for operative delivery, shoulder dystocia and newborn asphyxia.

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 · 10.1080/00016340801899289

Cites

144 of 144 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 144 references

Cited by

See all 454

Metadata

Authors
HENRIKSEN, T.
Venue
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-02
Volume
87
Issue
2
Pages
134-145
ISSN
  • 0001-6349 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0412
OpenAlex
W2022707347
Cited by
454
References
144
FWCI
19.48
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: The macrosomic fetus: a challenge in current obstetrics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00016340801899289
The paper
HENRIKSEN, T. (2008). The macrosomic fetus: a challenge in current obstetrics. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340801899289

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.