This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Assessing newborn body composition using principal components analysis: differences in the determinants of fat and skeletal size
© Shields et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006
Received: 26 April 2006
Accepted: 17 August 2006
Published: 17 August 2006
Birth weight is a composite of skeletal size and soft tissue. These components are likely to have different growth patterns. The aim of this paper is to investigate the association between established determinants of birth weight and these separate components.
Weight, length, crown-rump, knee-heel, head circumference, arm circumference, and skinfold thicknesses were measured at birth in 699 healthy, term, UK babies recruited as part of the Exeter Family Study of Childhood Health. Corresponding measurements were taken on both parents. Principal components analysis with varimax rotation was used to reduce these measurements to two independent components each for mother, father and baby: one highly correlated with measures of fat, the other with skeletal size.
Gestational age was significantly related to skeletal size, in both boys and girls (r = 0.41 and 0.52), but not fat. Skeletal size at birth was also associated with parental skeletal size (maternal: r = 0.24 (boys), r = 0.39 (girls) ; paternal: r = 0.16 (boys), r = 0.25 (girls)), and maternal smoking (0.4 SD reduction in boys, 0.6 SD reduction in girls). Fat was associated with parity (first borns smaller by 0.45 SD in boys; 0.31 SD in girls), maternal glucose (r = 0.18 (boys); r = 0.27 (girls)) and maternal fat (r = 0.16 (boys); r = 0.36 (girls)).
Principal components analysis with varimax rotation provides a useful method for reducing birth weight to two more meaningful components: skeletal size and fat. These components have different associations with known determinants of birth weight, suggesting fat and skeletal size may have different regulatory mechanisms, which would be important to consider when studying the associations of birth weight with later adult disease.
Birth weight, conventionally used as a measure of fetal growth, is a composite of many components including, bone, internal organs, muscle, fat and fluids. These may be determined by different regulatory mechanisms, both environmental and genetic. It has been suggested that fat-mass reflects the intra-uterine environment, whereas fat-free mass is more likely to be altered by genetic factors [1, 2].
A major determinant of body composition at birth is gender. Males tend to be longer and heavier than females, but females have more subcutaneous fat [1, 3–5]. Other factors known to influence body composition include parity and maternal BMI which have stronger associations with measures of fat at birth than measures of skeletal size [1, 2], and maternal [2, 6] and paternal [1, 7, 8] height which are more associated with skeletal size. The effects of smoking are less clear with some studies reporting a reduction only in skeletal measures as a result of maternal smoking [7, 9–12], whereas others find a general decrease in all aspects of growth [13–15].
Identifying factors related to fetal growth has become an important part of the study of the developmental origins of adult disease. Relationships between low birth weight and later ill health such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and obesity, are well established [16–19]. Not only is birth weight seen to be important, but also how thin, or how short, the baby is [20–22]. Considering components of birth weight separately, and investigating their determinants, may give more insight into these associations.
There are various methods of obtaining measures of body composition in utero and at birth. Studies have used DEXA scans [7, 23, 24], ultransonography [25–27], and total body electrical conductivity [9, 28]. These methods require expensive equipment, specialist training, and the more accurate methods are likely to be difficult to do in large samples. A simpler method for assessing body composition at birth is for midwives to take detailed anthropometry using standardized techniques, which can provide information on different aspects of growth. These measurements can be analysed individually [2, 5, 13, 14, 29]. However, often these measurements tend to be highly intercorrelated leading to problems of multicollinearity in regression analysis. Careful decisions, therefore, need to be made as to which measurements are the most appropriate and convey most information describing the aspect of growth of interest. A method able to combine them to provide more general estimates of size and body composition (as DEXA and ultrasonography do) would have considerable advantages. Mathematical equations to obtain estimates of body composition have been used previously, but these equations are not internally derived [1, 30].
An alternative way of summarizing body size and composition using anthropometric measurements could be to use principal components analysis (PCA) , a method previously used to describe different aspects of birth size [10, 23, 32, 33]. This statistical approach can be used to investigate the underlying structure of a dataset, by reducing the data to meaningful components. This method enables a large number of correlated variables to be summarized in terms of a relatively small number of uncorrelated principal components. The extent to which the principal components capture the variation in the original variables can be quantified in terms of the proportion of variance explained. The components can aid interpretation and represent meaningful constructs that parsimoniously describe the multivariate data.
We used principal components analysis to reduce multivariate measurements at birth to two more meaningful independent components representing different aspects of birth size: skeletal size and fat. We examined their relationships with established determinants of birth weight.
a) Subjects and methods
Families were recruited as part of the Exeter Family Study of Childhood Health , a large prospective study investigating genetic influences on fetal and early childhood growth. Parents were approached at the time of the ante-natal booking visit and invited to take part if they were Caucasian and living in central Exeter, as defined by postcode. Multiple pregnancies and women with diabetes were excluded. Both parents were required for the study. Informed written consent was obtained from the parents of the newborns and the study was approved by the North and East Devon Local Research Ethics Committee. In this paper we report the results of the first 800 families recruited between March 2000 and July 2003.
Babies were measured in detail within 24 hours of birth, in triplicate, by specially trained research midwives who underwent periodic inter-observer comparisons to ensure reliability and comparability. Birth weight was measured using a Soenhle scale and birth length was measured using the Harpenden Infantometer. Knee/heel length was measured using simple vernier calipers (to nearest 1 mm), and head and arm circumference with a short fiberglass tape (to nearest 1 mm). Skinfold thicknesses of the tricep and subscapular were taken using Holtain skinfold calipers (to nearest 0.2 mm).
Gestation was calculated based on last menstrual period (LMP) when periods were regular and where information was thought reliable (n = 369). Every woman had a dating scan around 12 weeks gestation (range 7–23 weeks) and gestation was determined by this method for women with irregular/unreliable menstrual cycles or if it differed from the LMP estimate by more than 10 days (n = 330).
Detailed anthropometric measurements were taken on both parents at 28 weeks gestation by the research midwives. Weight was measured using Tanita electric scales (to nearest 0.1 kg). A Harpenden pocket stadiometer was used for height and sitting-height measurements, and simple vernier calipers (to nearest 0.1 cm) were used for knee-heel length. Head and arm circumference were measured using a short, non-stretchable fiberglass tape (to nearest 0.1 cm), and a strong fiberglass tape (range up to 150 cm) was used for waist and hip measurements in the father. Skinfold thicknesses of the bicep, triceps and subscapula, plus the suprailiac in the father only were taken on the non-dominant side of the body (to nearest 0.2 mm using Holtain skinfold calipers). Coefficient of variation (CV) between midwives was less than 1% for weight and linear measures, and less than 5% for measures of skinfold thickness.
Fasting plasma glucose concentration was measured in the mother, also at 28 weeks gestation, using standard laboratory methods carried out by the pathology laboratories at the Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK.
Distributions of individual variables were assessed for normality and in the case of skinfold thicknesses and weight, log transformations were applied. For these variables, geometric means are presented.
Principal components analysis was carried out on the anthropometric measurements from both parents and their babies at birth. The components analysis was based on correlation matrices rather than covariance matrices as the variables were on different scales of measurement. Varimax rotation was applied to transform the original principal components produced, to ease interpretation. This method searches for a linear combination of the original measurements aiming to maximize the variance of the component loadings, leading to high correlations with some of the original variables, and low correlations with others. As the associations between the rotated components and the original variables are on scales of 0 to 1, it becomes easier to define them.
Interpretable principal components scores were produced summarizing the multivariate data in terms of standardized variables with zero mean and standard deviation of one. Recognising the differences in anthropometry between the sexes, boys and girls were analysed separately. Components were also produced for both parents.
T tests were used to examine the effect of parity (primiparous or multiparous) and smoking. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to assess relationships of birth components with gestation, maternal fasting glucose, and parental size components. Multiple linear regression analysis was applied to determine independent predictors of the birth components.
a) Study cohort (Fig 1)
Disposition of the 800 families initially recruited into the EFSOCH study is presented in Figure 1. The analysis presented in this paper focuses on the 752 healthy full term babies. Full anthropometric data were unavailable for 53 (7%) of these babies. There was no evidence of any differences in birth weight and gestation between those with measures available and those without (birth weight: 3521 g v 3511 g, p = 0.893, respectively; gestation: 40.2 wks v 39.9 wks, p = 0.101, respectively).
Characteristics of EFSOCH babies at birth.
Boys (mean +/- SD)
Girls (mean +/- SD)
40.1 +/- 1.14
40.2 +/- 1.27
3559 +/- 461
3479 +/- 482
50.5 +/- 2.0
49.7 +/- 2.1
Crown rump (cm)
34.1 +/- 1.6
33.7 +/- 1.7
Knee heel (cm)
12.6 +/- 0.6
12.4 +/- 0.6
Head circ (cm)
35.5 +/- 1.2
34.9 +/- 1.3
Arm circ (cm)
11.1 +/- 0.9
11.1 +/- 0.9
Ponderal index (kg/m3)
27.5 +/- 2.6
28.1 +/- 2.6
Characteristics of parents in EFSOCH.
Mothers (mean +/- SD)
Fathers (mean +/- SD)
30 +/- 5.2
33 +/- 6.0
164.9 +/- 6.3
177.8 +/- 6.7
27.9 +/- 4.7
26.7 +/- 3.9
Knee heel (cm)
49.5 +/- 2.5
53.9 +/- 2.6
Sitting Height (cm)
85.3 +/- 3.4
90.5 +/- 3.5
Head Circumference (cm)
55.8 +/- 1.5
58.3 +/- 1.6
Arm Circumference (cm)
29.0 +/- 3.5
31.7 +/- 3.1
Bicep skinfold thickness (mm)*
Tricep skinfold thickness (mm)*
Subscapular skinfold thickness (mm)*
Suprailiac skinfold thickness (mm)
26.6 +/- 10.3
Waist circumference (cm)
92.2 +/- 11.1
Hip circumference (cm)
104.6 +/- 7.0
b) Principal components analysis
All birth measures were entered into a principal components analysis. In each case the birth measurements were reduced to two components.
Unrotated components matrix for principal components analysis of boys' and girls' birth anthropometry.
Cumulative Variance (%)
Varimax rotated components matrix for principal components analysis of boys' and girls' birth anthropometry.
Cumulative Variance (%)
Rotated components matrix for principal components analysis of mothers' and fathers' anthropometry.
c) Associations with skeletal size and fat at birth
The rotated components at birth were examined for associations with characteristics known to be associated with birth weight.
i) Categorical variables: birth order and smoking
ii) Continuous variables: gestation, maternal glucose and parental size
Determinants of birth skeletal size and fat in boys and girls:
Boys skeletal size
Girls skeletal size
Maternal skeletal component
Maternal fat component
Paternal skeletal component
Paternal fat component
iii) Multiple linear regression analysis
Multiple regression analysis of predictors of boys and girls skeletal size and fat components. Only factors with p < 0.1 are shown.
Boys skeletal size
Maternal Skeletal Size
Paternal Skeletal Size
Girls' Skeletal Size
Maternal Skeletal Size
Paternal Skeletal Size
Maternal Skeletal Size
The strongest independent associations found with skeletal size components in both sexes were gestation, and maternal and paternal skeletal size. Other significant independent predictors of the skeletal size component were maternal glucose in the girls only, parity in the boys (which did not quite reach significance in the girls) and maternal smoking which showed a negative association in both.
Parity and maternal glucose showed independent associations with the fat component in both boys and girls. The strongest independent predictor of the girls' fat component was maternal fat, which did not reach significance in the boys' analysis. Maternal smoking and maternal skeletal size both showed negative independent associations with the boys' fat component, but there was no association with the girls'.
Data were assessed for model fit, and apart from one outlying observation in the skeletal data for boys and for girls, there was no evidence of any departure from the model assumptions. The removal of these outliers did not substantially alter the conclusions.
Principal components analysis produced two clear components allowing recognition of discrete aspects of birth size when using the rotated analysis. The rotated components, which can be considered to represent "skeletal size" and "fat", had different associations with factors known to alter birth weight.
There are various methods of obtaining measures of fat and skeletal size in utero and at birth. Direct measures of body composition can be obtained using DEXA scans , ultransonography [25–27], and total body electrical conductivity [9, 28]. Although DEXA and ultrasonography would be the gold standard for measuring body composition, these methods are likely to be expensive and impractical in a large epidemiological study. Anthropometric measurements provide an alternative method where measures such as head circumference, length, and limb length can represent skeletal size, and measures of skinfold thicknesses can represent fat. Mathematical equations for combining these measurements to obtain estimates of body composition have previously been defined and can be applied retrospectively to the data [35, 36]. Principal components analysis is another way of summarizing body size and composition using these anthropometric measurements and enables easier analysis of the data by reducing the problem of multicollinearity. It is a well established statistical method that can easily be implemented and allows the components to be internally derived from the data.
It has been suggested that genetic factors are more likely to alter skeletal size whereas the intrauterine environment has more of an effect on fat mass. We were able to gain some insight into potential genetic determinants by also producing components for the mother and father, which had not been carried out in other studies looking at PCA on birth size. Maternal and paternal skeletal size components were found to have significant associations with the skeletal size components in boys and girls (Tables 6 and 7), in keeping with the notion that genetic factors are more likely to affect skeletal growth. This finding is consistent with associations found between parental height and birth length seen in other studies [2, 6–8, 10].
Factors associated with the fat component were largely those related to the intrauterine environment (Table 7) with parity and maternal glucose associated with fat in both boys and girls, and the strongest predictor of fat in the girls being maternal fat component (Table 7). Similar relationships of parity with fat measures have recently been reported [1, 2] and it has been suggested this is due to the mothers' vascular system becoming better adapted to the transfer of energy to the fetus after the first pregnancy . Our findings are also in agreement with other studies that have found maternal glucose [27, 28] and maternal BMI [2, 37] to be good predictors of measures of fat and soft tissue in babies at birth.
Maternal smoking appeared to alter only the skeletal size component (Fig 3b), suggesting the intra-uterine environment does play a role in determining skeletal size. This is consistent with previous research [7, 9, 10], particularly the studies by Lindley et al[11, 12] who found reduced birth length, and head circumference, but increased ponderal index in babies born to smoking mothers, suggesting fat deposition is maintained despite deficits in other aspects of fetal growth. Other studies have found maternal smoking to be associated with a reduction in all measures of size, including fat and skinfold thicknesses [11, 13, 14], although the relationship with fat reported by Zaren et al was weak, and in the study by Cliver et al, skinfolds were only affected in babies born to heavy smokers. In multiple regression analysis (Table 7) smoking did show an independent association with the fat component in the boys, but not the girls, which may account for some of the differences in the literature. This sexual dimorphism has been seen before  and it was suggested that it may be due to hormonal differences.
These findings are all consistent with previous research. The disparity between the associations of gestation and the components of birth size, however, has not been described previously. In our data the strongest independent predictor of the skeletal size component in both boys and girls was gestation, but it showed no association with the fat component. It is important to note these results are only based on term babies, so gestation in this study refers to the limited period of 37–42 weeks. Our data suggest that after 37 weeks gestation the increase in birth weight is as a result of further skeletal growth, rather than fat deposition (Fig 4a and Table 7). In contrast, other studies have found increases in skinfold thickness [3, 5, 38] and fat mass  with gestational age at term. In our data, the subscapular skinfold thickness had a weak but significant correlation with gestation (r = 0.096, p = 0.011), but the tricep skinfold thickness did not (r = 0.067, p = 0.076). These differences may be partly due to what the components represent. A recent study by Guihard-Costa et al.  found that although skinfold thicknesses increased with gestation, their ratio with body weight between 33 and 42 weeks gestation significantly decreased, and this may reflect what is seen with our data. This finding warrants further investigation as our cross-sectional data are not conclusive.
Other studies have used principal components analysis to produce components describing birth size [10, 32, 33], although they differ slightly from the components produced from our data. Denham et al used principal components analysis to describe differences in neonatal size between black and white babies of low socioeconomic status. The components they obtained were similar to the unrotated components produced in our data (Table 3), representing general body size, and contrasts between skeletal and fat measures (referred to as "body composition"). Hindmarsh et al examined size and shape at birth and reported 4 components in total, although the third and fourth components together explained only an additional 15% of the variation in birth measures. The first two components again were similar to our unrotated components. A key difference in our analysis, was the use of varimax rotation on the components (Table 4). The advantage of this method over the unrotated analysis, is that we obtained a clear distinction between measures of skeletal size and fat which are more meaningful in terms of explaining body size. Components representing skeletal size and fat were produced in the study by Evans et al investigating the effect of frequent prenatal ultrasound examinations on birthweight. However, their components were obtained by a slightly different method: two separate analyses were carried out, one entering in only skeletal measures, and one entering in only fat measures, rather than all measures being entered into one analysis. Similarly, Koo et al derived two components representing fat: one from PCA on neonatal body circumferences, and one from PCA on skinfold thickness measurements. The advantage of our method is that no clinical assumptions need to be made about the data prior to analysis. The components are derived purely from the data.
It is clear that this analysis will need to be repeated in another population, particularly as the difference in the effect of gestation on skeletal size and fat is not widely reported in the literature. Further research into how representative the components are of skeletal size and fat compared with more complex measures of body composition would also be of interest. However, other associations found with the components largely confirm what has been found in other studies looking at determinants of body composition, suggesting principal components analysis is a valid method for analysing birth size.
In conclusion, we have provided further evidence demonstrating principal components analysis is a useful method for analysing anthropometric data in babies at birth. The addition of varimax rotation enabled more distinct, clinically relevant, components to be produced than those seen in previous studies. We have clearly shown differences in the determinants of skeletal size and fat components at birth, which support findings from previous research, as well as highlighting possible new areas for further study. This approach may be a useful tool in future investigations into the developmental origins of adult disease.
This study was funded by South West NHS Research and Development, Exeter NHS Research and Development and the Darlington Trust. ATH is a Wellcome Trust Research Leave fellow. BK holds a NHS Research and Development studentship. We gratefully acknowledge the hard work of the research midwives Martina Turner, Beverley Wilkins-Wall and Faye Sutton for their help in the collection of data.
- Catalano PM, Drago NM, Amini SB: Factors affecting fetal growth and body composition. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995, 172 (5): 1459-1463. 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90478-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Guihard-Costa AM, Papiernik E, Kolb S: Maternal predictors of subcutaneous fat in the term newborn. Acta Paediatr. 2004, 93 (3): 346-349. 10.1080/08035250410023007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Guihard-Costa AM, Grange G, Larroche JC, Papiernik E: Sexual differences in anthropometric measurements in French newborns. Biol Neonate. 1997, 72 (3): 156-164.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Copper RL, Goldenberg RL, Cliver SP, DuBard MB, Hoffman HJ, Davis RO: Anthropometric assessment of body size differences of full-term male and female infants. Obstet Gynecol. 1993, 81 (2): 161-164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rodriguez G, Samper MP, Ventura P, Moreno LA, Olivares JL, Perez-Gonzalez JM: Gender differences in newborn subcutaneous fat distribution. Eur J Pediatr. 2004, 163 (8): 457-461.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kirchengast S, Hartmann B, Schweppe KW, Husslein P: Impact of maternal body build characteristics on newborn size in two different European populations. Hum Biol. 1998, 70 (4): 761-774.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Godfrey K, Walker-Bone K, Robinson S, Taylor P, Shore S, Wheeler T, Cooper C: Neonatal bone mass: influence of parental birthweight, maternal smoking, body composition, and activity during pregnancy. J Bone Miner Res. 2001, 16 (9): 1694-1703. 10.1359/jbmr.2001.16.9.1694.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Knight B, Shields BM, Turner M, Powell RJ, Yajnik CS, Hattersley AT: Evidence of genetic regulation of fetal longitudinal growth. Early Hum Dev. 2005, 81 (10): 823-831. 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2005.06.003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lindsay CA, Thomas AJ, Catalano PM: The effect of smoking tobacco on neonatal body composition. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997, 177 (5): 1124-1128. 10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70027-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hindmarsh PC, Geary MP, Rodeck CH, Kingdom JC, Cole TJ: Intrauterine growth and its relationship to size and shape at birth. Pediatr Res. 2002, 52 (2): 263-268. 10.1203/01.PDR.0000020600.45753.78.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lindley AA, Gray RH, Herman AA, Becker S: Maternal cigarette smoking during pregnancy and infant ponderal index at birth in the Swedish Medical Birth Register, 1991-1992. Am J Public Health. 2000, 90 (3): 420-423.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Lindley AA, Becker S, Gray RH, Herman AA: Effect of continuing or stopping smoking during pregnancy on infant birth weight, crown-heel length, head circumference, ponderal index, and brain:body weight ratio. Am J Epidemiol. 2000, 152 (3): 219-225. 10.1093/aje/152.3.219.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zaren B, Lindmark G, Gebre-Medhin M: Maternal smoking and body composition of the newborn. Acta Paediatr. 1996, 85 (2): 213-219.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cliver SP, Goldenberg RL, Cutter GR, Hoffman HJ, Davis RO, Nelson KG: The effect of cigarette smoking on neonatal anthropometric measurements. Obstet Gynecol. 1995, 85 (4): 625-630. 10.1016/0029-7844(94)00437-I.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zaren B, Lindmark G, Bakketeig L: Maternal smoking affects fetal growth more in the male fetus. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2000, 14 (2): 118-126. 10.1046/j.1365-3016.2000.00247.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Godfrey KM, Barker DJ: Fetal programming and adult health. Public Health Nutr. 2001, 4 (2B): 611-624.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Barker DJ: Fetal nutrition and cardiovascular disease in later life. Br Med Bull. 1997, 53 (1): 96-108.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Barker DJ: Fetal origins of coronary heart disease. BMJ. 1995, 311 (6998): 171-174.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Barker DJ, Hales CN, Fall CH, Osmond C, Phipps K, Clark PM: Type 2 (non insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus, hyerpertension, and hyperlipidaemia (syndrome x): relation to reduced fetal growth. Diabetologia. 1993, 36: 62-67. 10.1007/BF00399095.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Barker DJ, Osmond C, Simmonds SJ, Wield GA: The relation of small head circumference and thinness at birth to death from cardiovascular disease in adult life. BMJ. 1993, 306 (6875): 422-426.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Barker DJ, Godfrey KM, Osmond C, Bull A: The relation of fetal length, ponderal index and head circumference to blood pressure and the risk of hypertension in adult life. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 1992, 6: 35-44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Phillips DIW, Barker DJP, Hales CN, Hirst S, Osmond C: Thinness at birth and insulin resistance in adult life. Diabetologia. 1994, 37: 150-154. 10.1007/s001250050086.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Koo WW, Walters JC, Hockman EM: Body composition in neonates: relationship between measured and derived anthropometry with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements. Pediatr Res. 2004, 56 (5): 694-700. 10.1203/01.PDR.0000142587.59238.BD.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hammami M, Koo WW, Hockman EM: Body composition of neonates from fan beam dual energy X-ray absorptiometry measurement. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2003, 27 (6): 423-426.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bernstein IM, Goran MI, Amini SB, Catalano PM: Differential growth of fetal tissues during the second half of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997, 176 (1 Pt 1): 28-32. 10.1016/S0002-9378(97)80006-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bernstein IM, Plociennik K, Stahle S, Badger GJ, Secker-Walker R: Impact of maternal cigarette smoking on fetal growth and body composition. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000, 183 (4): 883-886. 10.1067/mob.2000.109103.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Parretti E, Carignani L, Cioni R, Bartoli E, Borri P, La Torre P, Mecacci F, Martini E, Scarselli G, Mello G: Sonographic evaluation of fetal growth and body composition in women with different degrees of normal glucose metabolism. Diabetes Care. 2003, 26 (10): 2741-2748.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Catalano PM, Thomas A, Huston-Presley L, Amini SB: Increased fetal adiposity: a very sensitive marker of abnormal in utero development. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003, 189 (6): 1698-1704. 10.1016/S0002-9378(03)00828-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Guihard-Costa AM, Papiernik E, Grange G, Richard A: Gender differences in neonatal subcutaneous fat store in late gestation in relation to maternal weight gain. Ann Hum Biol. 2002, 29 (1): 26-36. 10.1080/03014460110054975.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Catalano PM, Drago NM, Amini SB: Maternal carbohydrate metabolism and its relationship to fetal growth and body composition. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995, 172 (5): 1464-1470. 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90479-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mardia KV, Kent JT, Bibby JM: Multivariate Analysis. 1979, London , Academic Press Inc. Ltd.Google Scholar
- Denham M, Schell LM, Gallo M, Stark A: Neonatal size of low socio-economic status Black and White term births in Albany County, NYS. Ann Hum Biol. 2001, 28 (2): 172-183. 10.1080/03014460151056374.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Evans S, Newnham J, MacDonald W, Hall C: Characterisation of the possible effect on birthweight following frequent prenatal ultrasound examinations. Early Hum Dev. 1996, 45 (3): 203-214. 10.1016/0378-3782(96)01728-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Knight B, Shields BM, Hattersley AT: The Exeter Family Study of Childhood Health (EFSOCH): study protocol and methodology. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006, 20 (2): 172-179. 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2006.00701.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dauncey MJ, Gandy G, Gairdner D: Assessment of total body fat in infancy from skinfold thickness measurements. Arch Dis Child. 1977, 52 (3): 223-227.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Durnin JV, Womersley J: Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. Br J Nutr. 1974, 32 (1): 77-97. 10.1079/BJN19740060.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Neggers Y, Goldenberg RL, Cliver SP, Hoffman HJ, Cutter GR: The relationship between maternal and neonatal anthropometric measurements in term newborns. Obstet Gynecol. 1995, 85 (2): 192-196. 10.1016/0029-7844(94)00364-J.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gampel B: The Relation of Skinfold Thickness in the Neonate to Sex, Length of Gestation, Size at Birth and Maternal Skinfold. Hum Biol. 1965, 37: 29-37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/6/24/prepub
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.