Skip to main content
Log in

Parental recall of birthweight: A good proxy for recorded birthweight?

  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests potential associations between birthweight and disease in later life. For resource or other reasons recorded birthweight may be unavailable to researchers who have access to uniquely relevant outcome data. The present study examined the validity of parental recall of birthweight. Parents of 1015 males and females aged 12 and 15 years participating in the Young Hearts Study (a cluster random sample of 1015 males and females aged 12 and 15 years from post-primary schools in Northern Ireland) completed a questionnaire which included a question about their child's birthweight. The answer provided was compared with recorded birthweight obtained from archived computerised child health records with a cut-off point for inaccurate reporting set at ±227 g (1/2 lb). The influence of social class and weight at birth on accuracy of recall was also determined. A total of 84.8% of parents accurately recalled their child's birthweight to within 227 g. Parents from non-manual occupation social classes recalled birthweight more accurately than those from manual occupation social classes (88.0 vs. 82.6% accurate: χ2 = 4.81, p = 0.03). Parents of low birthweight infants tended to recall their birthweight less accurately than parents of normal weight infants: 76.1% accurate compared to 86.1% accurate: χ2 = 3.54, p = 0.06. Parents of high birthweight infants recalled their birthweight less accurately than parents of normal weight infants: 78.5% accurate: χ2 = 3.94, p = 0.05. In conclusion, parentally recalled birthweight may be a suitable proxy for recorded birthweight for population based research into disease in childhood and adolescence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barker DJ. Early growth and cardiovascular disease. Arch Dis Child 1999; 80: 305–306.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Martyn CN, Barker DJP, Jespersen S, Greenwald S, Osmond C, Berry C. Growth in utero, adult blood pressure and arterial compliance. Br Heart J 1995; 73: 116–121.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Phillips DIW. Insulin resistance as a programmed response to fetal undernutrition. Diabetologia 1996; 39: 1119–1122.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barker DJ, Martyn CN, Osmond C, Hales CN, Fall CH. Growth in utero and serum cholesterol concentrations in adult life. Br Med J 1993; 307: 1524–1527.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Martyn CN, Meade TW, Stirling Y, Barker DJ. Plasma concentrations of fibringoen and factor VII in adult and their relation to intrauterine growth. Br J Haematol 1995; 89: 142–146.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Barker M, Robinson S, Osmond C, Barker DJ. Birth-weight and body fat distribution in adolescent girls. Arch Dis Child 1997; 77: 381–383.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ekbom A, Trichopoulos D, Adami H, Hsieh CC, Lan SJ. Evidence of prenatal influences on breast cancer risk. Lancet 1992; 340: 1015–1018.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Michels KB, Trichopoulos D, Robins JM, et al. Birthweight as a risk for breast cancer. Lancet 1996; 348: 1542–1546.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sanderson M, Williams MA, Malone KE, et al. Perinatal factors and risk of breast cancer. Epidemiology 1996; 7: 34–37.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Heuch JM, Heuch I, Aksen LA, Kvale G. Risk of primary childhood brain tumours related to birth characteristics: A Norwegian prospective study. Int J Cancer 1998; 77: 498–503.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boreham C, Savage JM, Primrose D, Cran G, Strain J. Coronary risk factors in schoolchildren. Arch Dis Child 1993; 68: 182–186.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Offce of Population Censuses and Surveys. Standard Occupational Classification Vol 1. London: HMSO, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pyles MK, Stolz HR, MacFarlane JW. The accuracy of mothers' reports on birth and developmental data. Child Develop 1935; 6: 165–176.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hoekelman RA, Kelly J, Zimmer AW. The reliability of maternal recall mothers' remembrance of their infant's health and illness. Clin Paediatr 1976; 15: 261–265.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sheehan P, MacAirt J. Reliability of mother's recall of birth data. Irish Med J 1981; 74: 75.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Oates RK, Forrest D. Reliability of mother' reports of birth data. UST Paediatr 1984; 20: 185–186.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Eaton-Evans J, Dugdale AE. Recall by mothers of the birth weights and feeding of their children. Hum Nutr: Appl Nutr 1986; 40A: 171–175

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pless CE, Pless B. How well they remember. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1995; 149: 553–558.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Seidman DS, Slater PE, Ever-Hadani P, Gale R. Accuracy of mothers' recall of birthweight and gestational age. Br J Obst Gynaecol 1987; 94: 731–735.

    Google Scholar 

  20. O'sullivan JJ, Pearce MS, Parker L. Parental recall of birthweight: How accurate is it? Arch Dis Child 2000; 82: 202–203.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walton, K., Murray, L., Gallagher, A. et al. Parental recall of birthweight: A good proxy for recorded birthweight?. Eur J Epidemiol 16, 793–796 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007625030509

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007625030509

Navigation