{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030376670716889428, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02916160388821385, 'mean_word_length': 5.338461538461538, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prognostic models need to look beyond fetal size

Early and accurate identification of pregnancies with growth-restricted or macrosomic babies has the potential to reduce perinatal complications with close monitoring, and by planning the setting and timing of delivery. Numerous studies have developed prognostic models to predict small and large for gestational age infants, which are surrogate measures for infants at risk of adverse perinatal outcomes (Campbell S, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology 2014;43(1):3-10; McCowan LME et al. Plos One 2017; 12(1): e0169311). However, the focus of all published models has been to predict the size of the baby using arbitrarily chosen birth weight centiles, rather than identifying those at risk of complications. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.