Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 331

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 143 of the 143 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Macrosomia: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 216

·2020·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

Suspected macrosomia is encountered commonly in obstetric practice. As birth weight increases, the likelihood of labor abnormalities, shoulder dystocia, birth trauma, and permanent injury to the newborn increases. The purpose of this document is to quantify those risks, address the accuracy and limitations of methods for estimating fetal weight, and suggest clinical management for a pregnancy with suspected macrosomia. This document has been revised to include recent literature and updated information on the prevention of macrosomia.

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 · 10.1097/aog.0000000000003606

Cites

143 of 143 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 143 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Martin, 2018, Births: final data for 2017, Natl Vital Stat Rep, 67, 1
  2. Hamilton, 2015, Births: final data for 2014, Natl Vital Stat Rep, 64, 1
  3. Zafman, 2018, Accuracy of sonographic estimated fetal weight in suspected macrosomia: the likelihood of overestimating and underestimating the true birthweight [preprint], J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
  4. Blackwell, 2009, Overestimation of fetal weight by ultrasound: does it influence the likelihood of cesarean delivery for labor arrest?, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 200, 340.e1, 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.12.043 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.12.043
  5. Gupta, 2003, The incidence, risk factors and obstetric outcome in primigravid women sustaining anal sphincter tears, Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 82, 736, 10.1034/j.1600-0412.2003.00179.x · doi:10.1034/j.1600-0412.2003.00179.x
  6. Morrison, 1992, The diagnosis and management of dystocia of the shoulder, Surg Gynecol Obstet, 175, 515
  7. Froehlich, 2016, Association of recorded estimated fetal weight and cesarean delivery in attempted vaginal delivery at term. MSCE, for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network, Obstet Gynecol, 128, 487, 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001571 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001571
  8. 2017, Effect of diet and physical activity based interventions in pregnancy on gestational weight gain and pregnancy outcomes: meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials. International Weight Management in Pregnancy (i-WIP) Collaborative Group [published erratum appears in BMJ 2017;358:j3991], BMJ, 358, j3119
  9. Leaphart, 1997, Labor induction with a prenatal diagnosis of fetal macrosomia, J Matern Fetal Med, 6, 99

Cited by

See all 331

Metadata

Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2020-01
Volume
135
Issue
1
Pages
e18-e35
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4211170880
Cited by
331
References
143
FWCI
25.45
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: Macrosomia: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 216. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/aog.0000000000003606
The paper
Macrosomia: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 216. (2020). Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000003606

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.