Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Validity of recalled v. recorded birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • S. D. Shenkin (a1) (a2), M. G. Zhang (a3) (a4), G. Der (a2) (a5), S. Mathur (a4) (a6), T. H. Mina (a6) and R. M. Reynolds (a6)...

Abstract

Low birth weight is associated with adverse health outcomes. If birth weight records are not available, studies may use recalled birth weight. It is unclear whether this is reliable. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing recalled with recorded birth weights. We followed the Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) to May 2015. We included studies that reported recalled birth weight and recorded birth weight. We excluded studies investigating a clinical population. Two reviewers independently reviewed citations, extracted data, assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled in a random effects meta-analysis for correlation and mean difference. In total, 40 studies were eligible for qualitative synthesis (n=78,997 births from 78,196 parents). Agreement between recalled and recorded birth weight was high: pooled estimate of correlation in 23 samples from 19 studies (n=7406) was 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87–0.93]. The difference between recalled and recorded birth weight in 29 samples from 26 studies (n=29,293) was small [range −86–129 g; random effects estimate 1.4 g (95% CI −4.0–6.9 g)]. Studies were heterogeneous, with no evidence for an effect of time since birth, person reporting, recall bias, or birth order. In post-hoc subgroup analysis, recall was higher than recorded birth weight by 80 g (95% CI 57–103 g) in low and middle income countries. In conclusion, there is high agreement between recalled and recorded birth weight. If birth weight is recalled, it is suitable for use in epidemiological studies, at least in high income countries.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Validity of recalled v. recorded birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Validity of recalled v. recorded birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Validity of recalled v. recorded birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Address for correspondence: S. D. Shenkin, Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, EH16 4SB, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. (Email susan.shenkin@ed.ac.uk)

References

Hide All
1. Kuh, D, Ben-Shlomo, Y, Lynch, J, Hallqvist, J, Power, C. Life course epidemiology. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003; 57, 778783.
2. Baker, JL, Olsen, LW, Sørensen, TI. Weight at birth and all-cause mortality in adulthood. Epidemiology. 2008; 19, 197203.
3. Leon, DA, Lithell, HO, Vågerö, D, et al. Reduced fetal growth rate and increased risk of death from ischaemic heart disease: cohort study of 15 000 Swedish men and women born 1915-29. BMJ. 1997; 315, 396400.
4. Rich-Edwards, JW, Stampfer, MJ, Manson, JE, et al. Birth weight and risk of cardiovascular disease in a cohort of women followed up since 1976. BMJ. 1997; 315, 396400.
5. Casey, R, Rieckhoff, M, Beebe, SA. The accuracy of maternal report. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1992; 31, 200205.
6. Tate, AR, Dezateux, C, Cole, TJ, et al. Factors affecting a mother’s recall of her baby’s birth weight. Int J Epidemiol. 2005; 34, 688695.
7. Stroup, DF, Berlin, JA, Morton, SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000; 283, 20082012.
8. Moher, D, Liberati, A, Tetzlaff, J, Altman, DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009; 339, b2535.
9. Sou, SC, Chen, WJ, Hsieh, WS, Jeng, SF. Severe obstetric complications and birth characteristics in preterm or term delivery were accurately recalled by mothers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59, 429435.
10. Tehranifar, P, Liao, Y, Flom, JD, Terry, MB. Validity of self-reported birth weight by adult women: sociodemographic influences and implications for life-course studies. Am J Epidemiol. 2009; 170, 910917.
11. O’Sullivan, JJ, Pearce, MS, Parker, L. Parental recall of birth weight: how accurate is it? Arch Dis Child. 2000; 82, 202203.
12. Andersson, SW, Niklasson, A, Lapidus, L, et al. Poor agreement between self-reported birth weight and birth weight from original records in adult women. Am J Epidemiol. 2000; 152, 609616.
13. Catov, JM, Newman, AB, Kelsey, SF, et al. Accuracy and reliability of maternal recall of infant birth weight among older women. Ann Epidemiol. 2006; 16, 429431.
14. Jaspers, M, de Meer, G, Verhulst, FC, Ormel, J, Reijneveld, SA. Limited validity of parental recall on pregnancy, birth, and early childhood at child age 10 years. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63, 185191.
15. DerSimonian, R, Laird, N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7, 177188.
16. Pyles, MK, Stolz, HR, Macfarlene, JW. The accuracy of mothers’ reports on birth and developmental data. Child Dev. 1935; 6, 165176.
17. Donoghue, EC, Shakespeare, RA. The Reliability of peadiatric case-history milestones. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1967; 9, 6469.
18. Bailit, HL. Factors affecting mother’s estimations of their children’s birth weights. Public Heal Rep. 1968; 83, 10111014.
19. Porteous, JR, Meskin, LH, Proshek, JM, Ten Bensel, RW. Epidemiologic assessment of birth weight through maternal recall. J Dent Res. 1972; 52, 397.
20. Hoekelman, RA, Kelly, J, Zimmer, AW. The reliability of maternal recall. Mother’s remembrance of their infant’s health and illness. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1976; 15, 261265.
21. Axelsson, G, Rylander, R. Validation of questionnaire reported miscarriage, malformation and birth weight. Int J Epidemiol. 1984; 13, 9498.
22. Oates, RK, Forrest, D. Reliability of mothers’ reports of birth data. Aust Pediatr J. 1984; 20, 185186.
23. Victora, CG, Barros, FC, Martines, JC, Béria, JU, Vaughan, JP. AS MÃES LEMBRAM O PESO AO NASCER DE SEUS FILHOS? INTRODUÇÃO. Rev Saude Publica. 1985; 19, 195200.
24. Eaton-Evans, J, Dugdale, AE. Recall by mothers of the birth weights and feeding of their children. Hum Nutr Appl Nutr. 1986; 40, 171175.
25. Burns, TL, Moll, PP, Rost, CA, Lauer, RM. Mothers remember birthweights of adolescent children: The muscatine ponderosity family study. Int J Epidemiol. 1987; 16, 550555.
26. Seidman, DS, Slater, PE, Ever-Hadani, P, Gale, R. Accuracy of mothers’ recall of birthweight and gestational age. BJOG. 1987; 94, 731735.
27. Wilcox, WD, Gold, BD, Tuboku-Metzger, AJ. Maternal recall of infant birth weight. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1991; 30, 509510.
28. Lumey, LH, Stein, AD, Ravelli, CJ. Maternal recall of birthweights of adult children: validation by hospital and well baby clinic records. Int J Epidemiol. 1994; 23, 10061012.
29. Pless, CR, Pless, IB. How well they remember. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995; 149, 553558.
30. Troy, LM, Michels, KB, Hunter, DJ, et al. Self-reported birthweight and history of having been bBreastfed among younger women: an assessment of validity. Int J Epidemiol. 1996; 25, 122127.
31. Olson, JE, Shu, XO, Ross, Ja, Pendergrass, T, Robison, LL. Medical record validation of maternally reported birth characteristics and pregnancy-related events: a report from the Children’s Cancer Group. Am J Epidemiol. 1997; 145, 5867.
32. Gaskin, P, Walker, SP, Forrester, TE, Grantham-McGregor, SM. The validity of recalled birthweight in developing countries. Am J Public Health. 1997; 87, 114.
33. Sanderson, M, Williams, MA, Malone, KE, et al. Perinatal factors and risk of breast cancer. Epidemiology. 1996; 7, 3437.
34. Lederman, SA, Paxton, A. Maternal reporting of prepregnancy weight and birth outcome: consistency and completeness compared with the clinical record. Matern Child Health J. 1998; 2, 123126.
35. Tomeo, CA, Rich-Edwards, JW, Michels, KB, et al. Reproducibility and validity of maternal recall of pregnancy-related events. Epidemiology. 1999; 10, 774777.
36. Gofin, R, Neumark, YD, Adler, B. Birthweight recall by mothers of Israeli children. Public Health. 2000; 114, 161163.
37. Kemp, M, Gunnell, D, Maynard, M, Davey Smith, G, Frankel, S. How accurate is self reported birth weight among elderly? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000; 54, 639640.
38. Diaz, JF, GIlman, RH, Cabrera, L. Maternal reporting of birthweight in a Peruvian shanty town. Am J Public Health. 2000; 224, 871872.
39. Walton, KA, Murray, LJ, Gallagher, AM, et al. Parental recall of birthweight: a good proxy for recorded birthweight? Eur J Epidemiol. 2000; 16, 793796.
40. Allen, DS, Ellison, GTH, Dos Santos Silva, I, De Stavola, BL, Fentiman, IS. Determinants of the availability and accuracy of self-reported birth weight in middle-aged and elderly women. Am J Epidemiol. 2002; 155, 379384.
41. Lucia, VC, Luo, Z, Gardiner, JC, Paneth, N, Breslau, N. Reports of birthweight by adolescents and their mothers: comparing accuracy and identifying correlates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006; 20, 520527.
42. Araujo, CLP, Dutra, CLC, Hallal, PC. Validity of maternal report on birth weight 11 years after delivery: the 1993 Pelotas birth cohort study, Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil. Cad Saude Publica. 2007; 23, 24212427.
43. Adegboye, ARA, Heitmann, BL. Accuracy and correlates of maternal recall of birthweight and gestational age. BJOG. 2008; 115, 886893.
44. Wodskou, PM, Hundrup, YA, Obel, EB, Jørgensen, T. Validity of self-reported birthweight among middle-aged and elderly women in the Danish nurse cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010; 89, 11341139.
45. Boeke, CE, Marin, C, Oliveros, H, et al. Validity of maternal birth weight recall among Colombian children. Matern Child Health J. 2012; 16, 753759.
46. Lule, SA, Webb, EL, Ndibazza, J, et al. Maternal recall of birthweight and birth size in Entebbe, Uganda. Trop Med Int Health. 2012; 17, 14651469.
47. Gayle, HD, Yip, R, Frank, MJ, et al. Validation of maternally reported birth weights among 46,637 Tennessee WIC program participants. Public Health Rep. 2012; 103, 143147.
48. Bat-Erdene, U, Metcalfe, A, McDonald, SW, Tough, SC. Validation of Canadian mothers’ recall of events in labour and delivery with electronic health records. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013; 13(Suppl 1), S3.
49. Troude, P, L’Hélias, LF, Raison-Boulley, AM, et al. Perinatal factors reported by mothers: do they agree with medical records? Eur J Epidemiol. 2008; 23, 557564.
50. Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1, 307310.

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 1

 Unknown (478 KB)
478 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 2

 Unknown (563 KB)
563 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 3

 Unknown (457 KB)
457 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 4

 Unknown (561 KB)
561 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 5

 Unknown (509 KB)
509 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 6

 Unknown (617 KB)
617 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Figure 7

 Unknown (619 KB)
619 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

Shenkin supplementary material
Appendix 1

 Word (14 KB)
14 KB

Validity of recalled v. recorded birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • S. D. Shenkin (a1) (a2), M. G. Zhang (a3) (a4), G. Der (a2) (a5), S. Mathur (a4) (a6), T. H. Mina (a6) and R. M. Reynolds (a6)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.