Dataset Information

INTERGROWTH-21st Project international INTER-NDA standards for child development at 2 years of age: an international prospective population-based study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To describe the construction of the international INTERGROWTH-21st Neurodevelopment Assessment (INTER-NDA) standards for child development at 2 years by reporting the cognitive, language, motor and behaviour outcomes in optimally healthy and nourished children in the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

Design

Population-based cohort study, the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

Setting

Brazil, India, Italy, Kenya and the UK.

Participants

1181 children prospectively recruited from early fetal life according to the prescriptive WHO approach, and confirmed to be at low risk of adverse perinatal and postnatal outcomes.

Primary measures

Scaled INTER-NDA domain scores for cognition, language, fine and gross motor skills and behaviour; vision outcomes measured on the Cardiff tests; attentional problems and emotional reactivity measured on the respective subscales of the preschool Child Behaviour Checklist; and the age of acquisition of the WHO gross motor milestones.

Results

Scaled INTER-NDA domain scores are presented as centiles, which were constructed according to the prescriptive WHO approach and excluded children born preterm and those with significant postnatal/neurological morbidity. For all domains, except negative behaviour, higher scores reflect better outcomes and the threshold for normality was defined as ≥10th centile. For the INTER-NDA's cognitive, fine motor, gross motor, language and positive behaviour domains these are ≥38.5, ≥25.7, ≥51.7, ≥17.8 and ≥51.4, respectively. The threshold for normality for the INTER-NDA's negative behaviour domain is ≤50.0, that is, ≤90th centile. At 22-30 months of age, the cohort overlapped with the WHO motor milestone centiles, showed low postnatal morbidity (<10%), and vision outcomes, attentional problems and emotional reactivity scores within the respective normative ranges.

Conclusions

From this large, healthy and well-nourished, international cohort, we have constructed, using the WHO prescriptive methodology, international INTER-NDA standards for child development at 2 years of age. Standards, rather than references, are recommended for population-level screening and the identification of children at risk of adverse outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Fernandes M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7282399 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdaptation of standardized early child development (ECD) assessments to low- and middle-income countries can be challenging because of culture-specific factors relating to language, content, context, and tool administration, and because the reliance of these tests on specialist healthcare professionals limits their scalability in low resource settings.MethodsWe report the cross-cultural adaptation of an international, standardized ECD instrument, the INTERGROWTH-21st Project Neurodevelopment Assessment (INTER-NDA), measuring cognitive, language, motor and behavioural outcomes in 2-year-olds, from a UK-based English-speaking population to the English-speaking Caribbean. Children aged 22-30 months were recruited from a pre-existing randomized controlled neurodevelopment intervention study in Grenada, West Indies.ResultsEight of 37 INTER-NDA items (22%) were culturally and linguistically adapted for implementation in the Caribbean context. Protocol adherence across seven newly-trained non-specialist child development assessors was 89.9%; six of the seven assessors scored ≥80%. Agreement between the expert assessor and the non-specialist child development assessors was substantial (κ = 0.89 to 1.00 (95% CI [0.58, 1.00]). The inter-rater and test-retest reliability for non-specialist child development assessors was between κ = 0.99 -1.00 (95% CI [0.98, 0.99]) and κ = 0.76 - 1.00 (95% CI [0.33, 1.00]) across all INTER-NDA domains.ConclusionsThe current study provides evidence to support the use of the adapted INTER-NDA by trained, non-specialist assessors to measure ECD prevalence in the English-speaking Caribbean. It also provides a methodological template for the adaptation of child developmental measures to cultural and linguistic contexts that conform to the cultural standards of the countries in which they are utilized to aid in the measurement of neurodevelopmental impairments (NDIs) in a variety of global clinical settings.

Project description:ObjectiveEstimated fetal weight (EFW) and fetal biometry are complementary measures used to screen for fetal growth disturbances. Our aim was to provide international EFW standards to complement the INTERGROWTH-21st Fetal Growth Standards that are available for use worldwide.MethodsWomen with an accurate gestational-age assessment, who were enrolled in the prospective, international, multicenter, population-based Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) and INTERBIO-21st Fetal Study (FS), two components of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project, had ultrasound scans every 5 weeks from 9-14 weeks' until 40 weeks' gestation. At each visit, measurements of fetal head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter, occipitofrontal diameter, abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) were obtained blindly by dedicated research sonographers using standardized methods and identical ultrasound machines. Birth weight was measured within 12?h of delivery by dedicated research anthropometrists using standardized methods and identical electronic scales. Live babies without any congenital abnormality, who were born within 14 days of the last ultrasound scan, were selected for inclusion. As most births occurred at around 40 weeks' gestation, we constructed a bootstrap model selection and estimation procedure based on resampling of the complete dataset under an approximately uniform distribution of birth weight, thus enriching the sample size at extremes of fetal sizes, to achieve consistent estimates across the full range of fetal weight. We constructed reference centiles using second-degree fractional polynomial models.ResultsOf the overall population, 2404 babies were born within 14 days of the last ultrasound scan. Mean time between the last scan and birth was 7.7 (range, 0-14) days and was uniformly distributed. Birth weight was best estimated as a function of AC and HC (without FL) as log(EFW)?=?5.084820?-?54.06633?×?(AC/100)3 ?-?95.80076?×?(AC/100)3 ?×?log(AC/100)?+?3.136370?×?(HC/100), where EFW is in g and AC and HC are in cm. All other measures, gestational age, symphysis-fundus height, amniotic fluid indices and interactions between biometric measures and gestational age, were not retained in the selection process because they did not improve the prediction of EFW. Applying the formula to FGLS biometric data (n?=?4231) enabled gestational age-specific EFW tables to be constructed. At term, the EFW centiles matched those of the INTERGROWTH-21st Newborn Size Standards but, at?<?37?weeks' gestation, the EFW centiles were, as expected, higher than those of babies born preterm. Comparing EFW cross-sectional values with the INTERGROWTH-21st Preterm Postnatal Growth Standards confirmed that preterm postnatal growth is a different biological process from intrauterine growth.ConclusionsWe provide an assessment of EFW, as an adjunct to routine ultrasound biometry, from 22 to 40 weeks' gestation. However, we strongly encourage clinicians to evaluate fetal growth using separate biometric measures such as HC and AC, as well as EFW, to avoid the minimalist approach of focusing on a single value. © 2016 Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Project description:BackgroundGestational hypertensive and acute hypotensive disorders are associated with maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. However, physiological blood pressure changes in pregnancy are insufficiently defined. We describe blood pressure changes across healthy pregnancies from the International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st Century (INTERGROWTH-21st) Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) to produce international, gestational age-specific, smoothed centiles (third, 10th, 50th, 90th, and 97th) for blood pressure.Methods and findingsSecondary analysis of a prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study (2009 to 2016) was conducted across 8 diverse urban areas in Brazil, China, India, Italy, Kenya, Oman, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. We enrolled healthy women at low risk of pregnancy complications. We measured blood pressure using standardised methodology and validated equipment at enrolment at <14 weeks, then every 5 ± 1 weeks until delivery. We enrolled 4,607 (35%) women of 13,108 screened. The mean maternal age was 28·4 (standard deviation [SD] 3.9) years; 97% (4,204/4,321) of women were married or living with a partner, and 68% (2,955/4,321) were nulliparous. Their mean body mass index (BMI) was 23.3 (SD 3.0) kg/m2. Systolic blood pressure was lowest at 12 weeks: Median was 111.5 (95% CI 111.3 to 111.8) mmHg, rising to a median maximum of 119.6 (95% CI 118.9 to 120.3) mmHg at 40 weeks' gestation, a difference of 8.1 (95% CI 7.4 to 8.8) mmHg. Median diastolic blood pressure decreased from 12 weeks: 69.1 (95% CI 68.9 to 69.3) mmHg to a minimum of 68.5 (95% CI 68.3 to 68.7) mmHg at 19+5 weeks' gestation, a change of -0·6 (95% CI -0.8 to -0.4) mmHg. Diastolic blood pressure subsequently increased to a maximum of 76.3 (95% CI 75.9 to 76.8) mmHg at 40 weeks' gestation. Systolic blood pressure fell by >14 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure by >11 mmHg in fewer than 10% of women at any gestational age. Fewer than 10% of women increased their systolic blood pressure by >24 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure by >18 mmHg at any gestational age. The study's main limitations were the unavailability of prepregnancy blood pressure values and inability to explore circadian effects because time of day was not recorded for the blood pressure measurements.ConclusionsOur findings provide international, gestational age-specific centiles and limits of acceptable change to facilitate earlier recognition of deteriorating health in pregnant women. These centiles challenge the idea of a clinically significant midpregnancy drop in blood pressure.

Project description:BackgroundFetal growth restriction is a major complication of pregnancy and is associated with stillbirth, infant death and child morbidity. Ultrasound monitoring of pregnancy is becoming more common in Africa for fetal growth monitoring in clinical care and research, but many countries have no national growth charts. We evaluated the new international fetal growth standards from INTERGROWTH-21st and WHO in a cohort from southern Benin.MethodsRepeated ultrasound and clinical data were collected in women from the preconceptional RECIPAL cohort (241 women with singleton pregnancies, 964 ultrasounds). We modelled fetal biometric parameters including abdominal circumference (AC) and estimated fetal weight (EFW) and compared centiles to INTERGROWTH-21st and WHO standards, using the Bland and Altman method to assess agreement. For EFW, we used INTERGROWTH-21st standards based on their EFW formula (IG21st) as well as a recent update using Hadlock's EFW formula (IG21hl). Proportions of fetuses with measurements under the 10th percentile were compared.ResultsMaternal malaria and anaemia prevalence was 43% and 69% respectively and 11% of women were primigravid. Overall, the centiles in the RECIPAL cohort were higher than that of INTERGROWTH-21st and closer to that of WHO. Consequently, the proportion of fetuses under 10th percentile thresholds was systematically lower when applying IG21st compared to WHO standards. At 27-31 weeks and 33-38 weeks, respectively, 7.4% and 5.6% of fetuses had EFW <10th percentile using IG21hl standards versus 10.7% and 11.6% using WHO standards.ConclusionDespite high anemia and malaria prevalence in the cohort, IG21st and WHO standards did not identify higher than expected proportions of fetuses under the 10th percentiles of ultrasound parameters or EFW. The proportions of fetuses under the 10th percentile threshold for IG21st charts were particularly low, raising questions about its use to identify growth-restricted fetuses in Africa.

Project description:BackgroundGestational weight gain (GWG) is a critical factor for maternal and fetal health.ObjectiveTo identify maternal predictors of inadequate GWG according to the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations and Intergrowth-21st standards.MethodsA prospective epidemiological cohort study conducted from 2017 to 2023 in southeastern Brazil assessed 1,557 women at three different stages of pregnancy (≤ 18, 20-26, and 30-36 weeks of gestation) and at delivery. Sociodemographic, obstetric, lifestyle, nutritional, and maternal morbidity characteristics were collected, along with biochemical parameters.ResultsAmong the participants, 38.7% had GWG above IOM recommendations, while 67.5% had GWG above the Intergrowth-21st standards. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that women with pre-pregnancy obesity and women with the highest body fat percentage had, respectively, a 95% (OR = 1.95; 95% CI: 1.08-3.51) and 1% (OR = 1.01; 95% CI: 1.01-1.05) higher chance of GWG above IOM recommendations. Pregnant women in the lowest tertile of height, smokers, number of previous pregnancies, and women living in crowded homes had, respectively, a 57% (OR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.80), 36% (OR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.37-0.86), 35% (OR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.43-0.97), and 14% (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.59-0.86) lower chance of GWG above IOM recommendations. Women with diabetes were 2.53 times more likely (OR = 2.53; 95% CI: 1.32-4.83) to have GWG below IOM recommendations. Using the Intergrowth-21st standards, women with the highest body fat percentage had a 12% (OR = 1.12; 95% CI: 1.02-1.24) higher chance of GWG above the 90th percentile. Pregnant women in the lowest tertile of height were 2.82 times more likely (OR = 2.82; 95% CI: 1.08-8.13) and women with the lowest hemoglobin concentrations had a 41% lower chance (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.39-0.88) of having GWG below the 10th percentile. While both guidelines identified body fat percentage and pre-pregnancy obesity as significant predictors of excessive GWG, the Intergrowth-21st standards captured a higher percentage of women exceeding GWG limits.ConclusionThe findings underscore the importance of comparing two instruments for assessing the adequacy of GWG. The IOM and Intergrowth-21st standards provide complementary insights, which can help implement targeted interventions for specific groups of women based on their nutritional and socioeconomic status, lifestyle, and obstetric factors to prevent pregnancy-related complications.