Assessing the quality of last menstrual period date on California birth records

Birth certificate last menstrual period (LMP) date is widely used to estimate gestational age in the US. While data quality concerns have been raised, no large population-based study has isolated data quality issues by comparing birth record LMP (Birth LMP) with reliable LMP dates from another source. We assessed LMP data quality in 2002 California singleton livebirth records ( n  = 515 381) and in a subset of records with linked prenatally collected LMP from California's statewide Prenatal Expanded Alpha-fetoprotein Screening Program (XAFP) ( n  = 105 936). Missing or incomplete LMP data affected 13% of birth records; 17% of those had complete LMP within XAFP records.
Data quality indicators supported XAFP LMP as more accurate than Birth LMP, with a lower prevalence of digit preference, post-term delivery, out-of-range gestational age estimates and implausible birthweight-for-gestational age. The bimodal birthweight distribution evident at 20–31 weeks' gestation based on Birth LMP was nearly absent with XAFP LMP-based gestational age. Approximately 32% of the second birthweight mode was explained by apparent clerical errors in Birth LMP month. Digit preference errors, particularly day 1, were associated with gestational age overestimation. Preterm delivery rates were higher according to Birth (7.6%) vs. XAFP LMP (7.2%). One-fifth of observed preterm and over half of observed post-term births using Birth LMP were not true cases; 15% of true preterm cases were missed. African American or Hispanic, less educated, and publicly or uninsured women were most likely to be misclassified and have large LMP date discrepancies attributable to clerical or digit preference error. The implementation of a revised birth certificate is an opportunity for targeted training and data entry checks that could substantially improve LMP accuracy on birth records.     

Birthweight distributions by gestational age: comparison of LMP-based and ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age using data from the Swedish Birth Registry

Studies based on data from the US have reported that the birthweight distribution at gestational age 28–31 weeks is bimodal with a second peak occurring at approximately 3300 g, suggesting that there is misclassification of term infants. In these studies, gestational ages were estimated from the date of the last menstrual period (LMP), and it has been suggested that ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age would eliminate the problem with bimodal birthweight distributions. Swedish data include both measures, thus offering an opportunity for comparison. All singleton births in Sweden from 1993 to 2002 with information on birthweight were included in the study ( n  = 917 901). Both LMP- and ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age were available for 75.1% of the births. Two possible sources of misclassification were considered: measurement error, assuming that ultrasound-based estimates are better, and data entry errors. An algorithm for assessment of data entry errors was developed; 67.4% of the births were left for the analyses of data 'cleaned' from data entry errors.
Based on the entire study population, the LMP-based birthweight curves for lower-gestational-age preterm births were bimodal, with a second peak around 3500 g. The bimodal distribution was greatly attenuated when using ultrasound-based gestational age categories, but did not disappear. After cleaning the data, the LMP-based birthweight distributions for infants at gestational ages <32 weeks were no longer bimodal, and were very similar to the ultrasound-based curves. In conclusion, data entry errors are more likely to cause the bimodality in the birthweight distribution among preterm infants than measurement errors in the LMP-based gestational age estimate.     

Trend in cerebral palsy birth prevalence in eastern Denmark: birth-year period 1979–86

To investigate changes in cerebral palsy birth prevalence and perinatal mortality rate by different gestational age groups, 1979–86, cerebral palsy cases in eastern Denmark were identified from the Danish Cerebral Palsy Register, and information on birth and mortality rates was sought in the Danish Medical Birth Register. From 1979–82 to 1983–86, the birth prevalence of cerebral palsy increased from 2.6 to 3.0 per 1000 ( P  < 0.05). The rate for infants of 31 weeks' gestation or more did not change, whereas a significant increase was observed in infants below 31 weeks (85–123 per 1000, P  < 0.05). In the same periods, perinatal mortality in eastern Denmark decreased significantly from 8.6 to 7.8 per 1000. The decrease in stillbirth rate was significant in all subgroups of gestational ages except in those of 28–30 weeks' gestation. The early neonatal mortality rate decreased significantly only in infants below 31 weeks (282–239 per 1000, P  < 0.05). Thus, in eastern Denmark, cerebral palsy birth prevalence has increased from birth-year period 1979–82 to 1983–86 because of an increased rate in preterm infants below 31 weeks, who at the same time had a reduced risk of early neonatal death.     

Menstrual versus clinical estimate of gestational age dating in the United States: temporal trends and variability in indices of perinatal outcomes

Accurate estimation of gestational age early in pregnancy is paramount for obstetric care decisions and for determining fetal growth and other conditions that may necessitate timing the iatrogenic intervention or delivery. We sought to examine temporal changes in the distributions of two measures of gestational age, namely, those based on menstrual dating and a clinical estimate. We further sought to evaluate relative comparisons and variability in indices of perinatal outcomes. We utilised the Natality data files in the US, 1990–2002 comprising women that delivered a singleton livebirth between 22 and 44 weeks gestation ( n  = 42 689 603).
Changes were shown in the distributions of gestational age based on menstrual vs. clinical estimate between 1990 and 2002, as well as changes in the proportions of preterm (<37, <32 and <28 weeks) and post-term (≥42 weeks) birth, and small- (SGA; <10th percentile) and large-for-gestational-age (LGA; birthweight >90th percentile) births. While the absolute rates of preterm birth <37 weeks, SGA and LGA births were lower based on the clinical estimate of gestational age relative to that based on menstrual dating, the increases in preterm birth rate between 1990 and 2002 were fairly similar between the two measures of gestational dating. However, the decline in post-term births was larger, based on the clinical estimate (−73.8%), than on the menstrual estimate (−36.6%) between 1990 and 2002. While the clinical estimate of gestational age appears to provide a reasonably good approximation to the menstrual estimate, disregarding the clinical estimate of gestational age may ignore the advantages of gestational age assessment in modern obstetrics.     

Gestational age-specific birthweight of twins in vital records

Analysis of singleton preterm birth from vital statistics data is hampered by inaccurate gestational age dating. This is most notably evidenced by the large fraction of implausibly high birthweights for gestational age given in birth records. Using natality statistics for New England, 1977–88, birthweight distributions were plotted for representative preterm gestations. Confounding by improbable birthweights was observed to be considerably less among preterm twin births than among preterm singleton births.     

United States vital statistics and the measurement of gestational age

Estimates of the gestational age of the newborn based on US Birth Certificate data are extensively used to monitor trends in infant and maternal health and to improve our understanding of adverse pregnancy outcome. Two measures of gestational age, the 'date of the last normal menses' (LMP) and the 'clinical estimate of gestation' (CE), have been available from birth certificate data since 1989. Reporting irregularities with the LMP-based measure are well-documented, and important questions remain regarding the derivation of the CE. Changes in perinatal medicine and in vital statistics reporting in recent years may have importantly altered gestational age data based on vital statistics. This study describes how gestational age measures are collected and edited in US national vital statistics, and examines changes in the reporting of these measures by race and Hispanic origin between 1990 and 2002. Data are drawn from the National Center for Health Statistics' restricted use US birth files for 1990–2002. Bivariable statistics are used.
The percentage of records with missing LMP dates declined markedly over the study period, overall, and for each racial/Hispanic origin group studied. A marked shift in the distribution of the CE of gestational age was also observed, suggesting changes both in the true distribution of age at birth, and in the derivation of this measure. Agreement between the LMP-based and CE estimates increased over the study period, especially among preterm births. However, a high proportion of LMP dates continue to be missing or invalid and the derivation of the CE is still uncertain. In sum, although the reporting of gestational age measures in vital statistics appears to have improved between 1990 and 2002, substantial concerns with both the LMP-based and the CE persist. Efforts to identify approaches to further improve upon the quality of these data are needed.     

State-Specific Trends in Preterm Delivery: Are Rates Really Declining Among Non-Hispanic African Americans Across the United States?

Objectives: This study sought to examine state-specific trends in preterm delivery rates among non-Hispanic African Americans and to assess whether these rates are influenced by misclassification of gestational age. Methods: The sample population consisted of singleton non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic African–American infants born in 1991 and 2001 to U.S. resident mothers. For both time periods, state-specific and national preterm delivery rates were calculated for all infants, stratified by infant race/ethnicity. Next, birth-weight distributions within strata of gestational age were studied to explore possible misclassifications of gestational age. Lastly, state-specific and national preterm delivery rates among infants who weighed less than 2,500 g were separately computed. Results: National analyses showed that the frequency of preterm delivery increased by 15.8% among non-Hispanic Whites but declined by 10.3% among non-Hispanic African Americans over the same period. For both subgroups, a bimodal distribution of birth weights was apparent among preterm births at 28–31 weeks of gestation. The second peak with its cluster of normal-weight infants was more prominent among non-Hispanic African Americans in 1991 than in 2001. After excluding preterm infants who weighed 2,500 g or more, the national trends persisted. State-specific analyses showed that preterm delivery rates increased for both subgroups in 13 states during this period. Of these 13, 6 states had a number of non-Hispanic African–American births classified as preterm that were apparently term births mistakenly assigned short gestational ages. Such misclassification was more frequent in 1991 than in 2001 and inflated 1991 rates. Conclusion: There is heterogeneity in state-specific preterm delivery rates. Such differences are often overlooked when aggregate results are presented.     

Variation between last-menstrual-period and clinical estimates of gestational age in vital records

An accurate assessment of gestational age is vital to population-based research and surveillance in maternal and infant health. However, the quality of gestational age measurements derived from birth certificates has been in question. Using the 2002 US public-use natality file, the authors examined the agreement between estimates of gestational age based on the last menstrual period (LMP) and clinical estimates in vital records across durations of gestation and US states and explored reasons for disagreement. Agreement between the LMP and the clinical estimate of gestational age varied substantially across gestations and among states. Preterm births were more likely than term births to have disagreement between the two estimates. Maternal age, maternal education, initiation of prenatal care, order of livebirth, and use of ultrasound had significant independent effects on the disagreement between the two measures, regardless of gestational age, but these factors made little difference in the magnitude of gestational age group differences. Information available on birth certificates was not sufficient to understand this disparity. The lowest agreement between the LMP and the clinical estimate was observed among preterm infants born at 28-36 weeks' gestation, who accounted for more than 90% of total preterm births. This finding deserves particular attention and further investigation.     

Comparison of gestational age at birth based on last menstrual period and ultrasound during the first trimester

Reported last menstrual period (LMP) is commonly used to estimate gestational age (GA) but may be unreliable. Ultrasound in the first trimester is generally considered a highly accurate method of pregnancy dating. The authors compared first trimester report of LMP and first trimester ultrasound for estimating GA at birth and examined whether disagreement between estimates varied by maternal and infant characteristics. Analyses included 1867 singleton livebirths to women enrolled in a prospective pregnancy cohort. The authors computed the difference between LMP and ultrasound GA estimates (GA difference) and examined the proportion of births within categories of GA difference stratified by maternal and infant characteristics. The proportion of births classified as preterm, term and post‐term by pregnancy dating methods was also examined. LMP‐based estimates were 0.8 days (standard deviation = 8.0, median = 0) longer on average than ultrasound estimates. LMP classified more births as post‐term than ultrasound (4.0% vs. 0.7%). GA difference was greater among young women, non‐Hispanic Black and Hispanic women, women of non‐optimal body weight and mothers of low‐birthweight infants. Results indicate first trimester report of LMP reasonably approximates gestational age obtained from first trimester ultrasound, but the degree of discrepancy between estimates varies by important maternal characteristics.     

Relationships between birthweight and biomarkers of chronic disease in childhood: Aboriginal Birth Cohort Study 1987–2001

Reports of relationships between lower birthweight and later chronic diseases are mainly from populations with low rates of low birthweight (LBW) and growth-restricted births. A prospective study of an Australian Aboriginal birth cohort with a mean birthweight of 3050 g (SD 630), 16% LBW and 28% fetal growth restriction was used to examine the relationships between birthweight and selected biomarkers of chronic adult disease.
At a mean age of 11.4 years (range 8.9–14), the mean weight was 35.7 kg (SD 11.8) and the mean height was 143.8 cm (SD 10.6). Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2000 growth references, weight and height-for-age z-scores were −0.8 (SD 1.4) and −0.5 (SD 1.07) respectively and using World Health Organisation criteria, 19% of children were classified as underweight (weight for age Z-score <2.0). The relationships between birthweight and blood pressure ( n  = 475), total cholesterol ( n  = 461), Apolipoprotein A-1 ( n  = 343), Apolipoprotein B ( n  = 390), respiratory function tests ( n  = 427), kidney size determined by ultrasound ( n  = 446), urinary albumin/creatinine ratio ( n  = 420) and fasting triglycerides ( n  = 281), insulin ( n  = 272) and glucose ( n  = 279) were examined using regression models adjusted for sex, gestational age, current age and puberty status. In this population with high rates of fetal growth restriction at birth and an excess of under-nutrition at age 11 years we found that birthweight had a negative relationship with child blood pressure only, while current child weight was positively related to blood pressure, total cholesterol, Apolipoprotein B, respiratory function tests, kidney size, and fasting triglycerides, insulin and glucose.     

Preterm delivery rates in North Carolina: are they really declining among non-Hispanic African Americans?

The preterm delivery rate in North Carolina is consistently higher than the national average. However, recent reports suggest that singleton preterm delivery rates for non-Hispanic Whites are increasing while those for non-Hispanic African Americans are decreasing. To study this pattern further, the authors examined data on singleton non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic African-American births in 1989 and 1999 by using North Carolina vital statistics data. They found that the frequency of preterm delivery rose 1.1% (8.5% to 9.6%) among non-Hispanic Whites but declined 1.4% (17.9% to 16.5%) among non-Hispanic African Americans over the same time period. For both subgroups, a bimodal distribution of birth weights was apparent among preterm births at 28-31 weeks of gestation. The second peak with its cluster of normal-weight infants was more prominent among non-Hispanic African Americans in 1989 than in 1999. To reduce the potential for bias due to misclassification of infant gestational age, frequencies of preterm delivery of infants who weighed less than 2,500 g were calculated. Unlike the original analysis, this calculation showed that preterm delivery increased for both subgroups. A number of non-Hispanic African-American births classified as preterm were apparently term births mistakenly assigned short gestational ages. Such misclassification was more frequent in 1989 than in 1999, inflating 1989 preterm delivery rates.     

Ethnic differences in the growth of low-birthweight infants

Differences in growth were investigated among ethnic groups in low-birthweight babies (<2500 g or <32 weeks gestation) at birth and at 2–3 years. This prospective study was based on data for all 3091 low-birthweight live births in the South East Thames Region, UK, over a 1-year period, surviving to discharge from hospital. Weights were recorded at birth and at 2–3 years for 998 babies, and head circumferences for 859. These were compared with the UK 1990 reference standards. Ethnic differences were adjusted for parity, multiple birth, smoking and alcohol during pregnancy, mother's height, weight and age, marital status, partner's support and social class. At 2–3 years, there was substantial average catch-up growth only for the weight of infants of 32 weeks' gestation. Babies <32 weeks gestation had fallen behind. Head circumferences had failed to keep up or had fallen behind for both groups. The ethnic groups had similar birthweight standard deviation scores (SDS). At 2–3 years, Black babies of <32 weeks' gestation had gained in weight and head circumference compared with White babies (adjusted difference in weight SDS: 0.71, [95% CI 0.28, 1.13]). Asian babies of at least 32 weeks' gestation had smaller heads than White, a difference that increased with time. It was concluded that ethnic differences in the growth of low-birthweight infants are related to gestational age. Although most of the babies born at <28 weeks' gestation were close to their birthweight reference standards, only the Black infants had maintained their position at 2–3 years. Black infants, particularly when born preterm, tend to put on more weight than White.     

Anthropometric measurements for neonates, 23 to 29 weeks gestation, in the 1990s

Reference data describing weight, length, and head circumference (anthropometric measurements) at birth were published by Lubchenco and Usher before 1970. Few attempts have been made to investigate whether these data are appropriate for today's cohort of preterm neonates. We analysed anthropometric data for neonates born between 23 and 29 weeks' gestation. Reference charts were developed from the measurements obtained from neonatal records, and gestational age, obtained from maternal charts, on 975 neonates delivered at four neonatal centres in Michigan during 1992 and 1997. The analysis was confined to children with gestational age that was consistent or within 7 days by last menstrual period, obstetric examination, ultrasound and neonatal determinations. At 23 to 29 weeks' gestation, ethnicity and multiple births did not have any significant impact on birthweight but girls were lighter. We compared our anthropometric charts with those presently being used at many neonatal centres. In our study, physical measurements at birth of preterm neonates born between 1992 and 1997 were significantly different from those currently used to assess growth status. Furthermore data derived from published studies that utilised birth certificates with gestational age based on last menstrual period seem to overestimate birthweight. For preterm infants, our findings are concordant with recently published values from 18 states of the US. Because of improved survival, gestational age assessment and perinatal care of preterm neonates, development of new reference anthropometric measurements for neonates is overdue. Our Michigan data of 23-29 weeks preterm provides new national reference values, which we recommend for use in US neonatal centres for extremely preterm neonates.     

Comparison of gestational age classifications: date of last menstrual period vs. clinical estimate

PURPOSE: The purpose was to compare the two different measures of gestational age currently used on birth certificates (the duration of pregnancy based on the date of last menstrual period [LMP] and the clinical estimate [CE] as related to health status indicators. We contrasted these measures by race/ethnicity. METHODS: NCHS natality files for 2000-2002 were used, selecting cases of single live birth to U.S. resident mothers with both LMP and CE gestational age information. RESULTS: Approximately 75% of the records had valid LMP and CE values and for approximately one-half of these, the LMP and CE values did not exactly agree. Overall and for each race and ethnic group, the LMP measures resulted in higher proportions of very preterm, preterm, postterm and SGA births. CE value provided preterm rates of 7.9% and for LMP, 9.9%. The odds ratio of preterm birth for African-Americans using the CE measure was 1.78 [95% Cl 1.77-1.79]. The odds ratio using LMP was 1.93 [95% Cl 1.92-1.94]. Whites were the referent population. CONCLUSIONS: Different measures of gestational age result in different overall and race-specific rates of very preterm, preterm, postterm, and SGA births. These findings indicate that substituting or combining these measures may have consequences.     

Comparison of Two Measures of Gestational Age Among Low Income Births. The Potential Impact on Health Studies, New York, 2005

Recently, the National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems considered changing the definition of gestational age from the current definition based on mother’s last normal menstrual period (LMP) to the clinical/obstetric estimate determined by the physician (CE).They determined additional information was needed. This study provides additional insight into the comparability of the LMP and CE measures currently used on vital records among births at risk for poor outcomes. The data consisted of all New York State (NYS) (excluding New York City) singleton births in 2005 among mothers enrolled in the NYS Women Infants and Children (WIC) program during pregnancy. Prenatal WIC records were matched to NYS’ Statewide Perinatal Data System. The analysis investigates differences between LMP and CE recorded gestations. Relative risks between risk factors and preterm birth were compared for LMP and CE. Exact agreement between gestation measures exists in 49.6% of births. Overall, 6.4% of records indicate discordance in full term/preterm classifications; CE is full term and LMP preterm in 4.9%, with the converse true for 1.5%. Associations between risk factor and preterm birth differed in magnitude based on gestational age measurement. Infants born to mothers with high risk indicators were more likely to have a CE of preterm and LMP full term. Changing the measure of gestational age to CE universally likely would result in overestimation of the importance of some risk factors for preterm birth. Potential overestimation of clinical outcomes associated with preterm birth may occur and should be studied.     

Cerebral palsy and intrauterine growth in single births: European collaborative study

Background   Cerebral palsy seems to be more common in term babies whose birthweight is low for their gestational age at delivery, but past analyses have been hampered by small datasets and Z -score calculation methods.
Methods   We compared data from 10 European registers for 4503 singleton children with cerebral palsy born between 1976 and 1990 with the number of births in each study population. Weight and gestation of these children were compared with reference standards for the normal spread of gestation and weight-for-gestational age at birth.
Findings   Babies of 32–42 weeks' gestation with a birthweight for gestational age below the 10th percentile (using fetal growth standards) were 4–6 times more likely to have cerebral palsy than were children in a reference band between the 25th and 75th percentiles. In children with a weight above the 97th percentile, the increased risk was smaller (from 1.6 to 3.1), but still significant. Those with a birthweight about 1 SD above average always had the lowest risk of cerebral palsy. A similar pattern was seen in those with unilateral or bilateral spasticity, as in those with a dyskinetic or ataxic disability. In babies of less than 32 weeks' gestation, the relation between weight and risk was less clear.
Interpretation   The risk of cerebral palsy, like the risk of perinatal death, is lowest in babies who are of above average weight-for-gestation at birth, but risk rises when weight is well above normal as well as when it is well below normal. Whether deviant growth is the cause or a consequence of the disability remains to be determined.