AJR ARRS Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Doubilet, P.
Right arrow Articles by Greenes, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Doubilet, P.
Right arrow Articles by Greenes, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 142, Issue 4, 797-800
Copyright © 1984 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Improved prediction of gestational age from fetal head measurements

PM Doubilet and RA Greenes

Gestational age estimation based on biparietal diameter alone was compared with three approaches to age prediction that consider head shape: area-corrected biparietal diameter, circumference-corrected biparietal diameter, and head circumference. The analysis was based on 67 fetuses (13-41 weeks) in whom age was known with a high degree of accuracy, using a crown-rump length measurement from a prior first trimester sonographic examination. The three methods that consider head shape are more precise than biparietal diameter alone (p less than 0.05 for second trimester cases, less significantly demonstrated for third trimester cases). While the three appear to be equal to one another in accuracy, area correction may be the preferred approach based on theoretical grounds and on convenience. It is easy and can be used in conjunction with any formula (or table) now applied to biparietal diameter alone.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
A.C. Ugwu, E.O. Ewunonu, I.C. Nwobi, O.C. Egwu, and K.N. Ovuoba
Sonographic Assessment of Fetal Cephalic Index in a Nigerian Population: A Novel Paradigm
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, March 1, 2007; 23(2): 87 - 90.
[PDF]


Home page
Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
B. Hearn-Stebbins
Normal Fetal Growth Assessment: A Review of Literature and Current Practice
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, July 1, 1995; 11(4): 176 - 187.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1984 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.