Abstract
Public health indicators generally operate in the world as credible, apolitical and authoritative. But indicators are less stable than they appear. Clinical critiques of Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR) criteria have been forthcoming for decades. This article, though, takes up the measuring and calculation gradients of IUGR in the ultrasound machine itself, including the software algorithms that identify IUGR. One hospital where research was conducted incorrectly predicted pathological birth outcomes 14 of 14 times. We are at a historical moment when the global use of prenatal diagnostic ultrasound for the express purpose of assessing IUGR is set to escalate. Medical imaging device corporations like Siemens, Toshiba, General Electric and Phillips are quite literally banking on it, and new forms of ultrasound technology and diagnostic software are increasingly available on smartphones, tablets and laptops. Clinical guidelines for IUGR – assumed to be authoritative and evidence-based – are evolving right along with the installation throughout the world of the technology capable of diagnosing it. Maternal malnutrition remains the single strongest predictive factor for IUGR, regardless of the technological investments currently amassing to identify the indicator, which is cause for a reassessment of priority spending and investment.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
