A test of agreement of customised birthweight models.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine whether the physiological effects on birthweight as described by customised birthweight models (CBMs) from various populations and locations are consistent when applied to a single sample. METHODS: The predicted birthweight was calculated for 52 826 White-European singleton term births between 1997 and 2008 from a large Australian hospital using the same set of variables from 12 published CBMs. The accuracy of prediction was tested against both the actual birthweight and a reference model. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) along with 95% confidence intervals of the measurements, paired differences (predicted-actual birthweight) and absolute values of the paired differences are reported. RESULTS: The average difference in predicted and actual birthweight was <200 g for all CBMs, with ICCs for all but one model indicating fair agreement (between 0.3 and 0.5). When compared with the reference model, eight of the 11 models had a difference in predicted birthweight of <220 g, and the ICCs indicated that the majority of models had strong agreement. CONCLUSION: All published CBMs demonstrated ability to predict birthweight with reasonable accuracy. The effects of maternal and fetal characteristics on birthweight appear to be consistent across birthweight models. This finding is a further step in validating the CBM, and provides greater evidence for the creation of a global model.