Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 135768

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2012 | Month : June | Volume : 6 | Issue : 5 | Page : 863 - 866 Full Version

Radiological Appearance of Molars: Do They Consistently Identify Babies of 33-36 Weeks Gestation?

Published: June 1, 2012 | DOI:
Akatoli Sema, Rajeev Sethi, V.K. Bhatia, Jacob Puliyel

1. Department of Pediatrics, St Stephens Hospital, Delhi, India. 2. Department of Radiology, St Stephens Hospital, Delhi, India. 3. Indian Agricultural Statistical Research Institute, Pusa Institute, Delhi, India. 4. Department of Pediatrics, St Stephens Hospital, Delhi, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Jacob Puliyel St Stephens Hospital, Tis Hazari, Delhi, India - 110054. E-mail:


Background: Gestational age is calculated from the date of the last menstrual period (LMP) may not be accurate when the cycle is irregular. In a previous study on small sample of European babies, the appearance of the cusps of the deciduous molar teeth on radiographs was found to be useful for determining the gestational age. The accuracy of this method was not affected by intra-uterine malnutrition. We did this prospective study on a large sample of newborns in India to validate the findings.

Materials and Methods: Chest radiographs taken within the first 3 days of life – when they included the mandible – were studied against gestational age. Dates as per LMP, confirmed by either ultrasound examination during pregnancy or by Ballard’s scoring after birth, were the standard against which tooth age was validated.

Results: The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the 1st molar was 0.933 (95% CI: 0.900 to 0.966) and that for the 2nd molar was 0.952 (95% CI: 0.920 to 0.983). Accuracy was only marginally affected by intrauterine malnutrition.

Conclusion: Tooth age may be used to estimate gestational age. Like the findings of ophthalmic examination at birth, tooth age is only marginally affected by intrauterine malnutrition.


Ballard’s score, Antenatal ultrasound age, Bone age, Tooth age, Small for gestational age

Neonatal mortality and morbidity varies according to the gestational age (1),(2). Accurate estimation of gestational age is important for correct management of the infant (3). Several methods for estimating gestational age are available (4). Most often, gestational age is calculated from the date of the last menstrual period (LMP) (5). When there is uncertainty about this on account of an irregular cycle (6),(7), antenatal ultrasound (8), bone age (9), and clinical examination of the infant for physical and neurological maturity (10) are used. These too have their drawbacks. Antenatal ultrasound measurements are biased when fetal growth is hampered (11). Bone ossification is also affected by various factors such as fetal malnutrition and intra-uterine hypothyroidism (12),(13). Post-natal clinical examination by Ballard’s scoring system has been found to give the best estimate of gestational age (14). Ballard’s scoring is however difficult to perform in sick preterm infants and in small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infants, as the general appearance is often indistinguishable from that of true prematures (15). Ophthalmic examination also yields clues regarding the true gestational age in SGA babies (16),(17). Nevertheless, estimating gestational age in sick preterm infants, especially those who are SGA, is a challenge.

In 1972, Kuhns et al., (18) studied the calcification crowns of the 1st and 2nd deciduous molars. Fifty-two newborn infants were evaluated. No 1st molar appeared before 33–34 weeks of gestation and no 2nd deciduous molar was radiographically visualized before 36–37 weeks; they were invariably found after that age. Accuracy of aging by this method was unaffected by intra-uterine growth retardation. However, the sample size in that study was small.

A large number of Indian babies are born SGA (19),(20). We undertook this prospective study to evaluate the usefulness of this method for estimating gestational age in this population with a large incidence of SGA babies.

Material and Methods

All newborn babies admitted in the neonatal nursery were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data was collected between 1st November 2006 and 31st December 2007. The LMP of the mother and antenatal ultrasound findings were noted. Gestational age assessment by the new Ballard’s scoring system is done routinely within 48 hours of birth in the nursery. Babies on ventilator and sick neonates are not subjected to this assessment. A baby was included in the study if he or she had a chest radiograph done within 72 hours of life and if the radiograph showed the mandible. No infant underwent radiographic examination solely for the purpose of this study. A priori, a family history of hypodontia was an exclusion criterion. Written informed consent was taken from the parents for gestational age assessment by the various methods. The study was approved by the hospital research board.

At the time of discharge, all radiographs of the child were assessed by one of the authors (RS) for calcification cusps of the 1st and 2nd molar teeth. This author was blind to the gestational age of the baby. A distinct line of calcification involving the cusps of a molar was looked for in the radiographs (Table/Fig 1), (Table/Fig 2), and (Table/Fig 3).

To overcome any possible error in LMP due to mistaken dates and irregular cycle length, only babies whose gestational age by LMP was confirmed by at least one other method (antenatal ultrasound estimation or Ballard’s scoring) were included in the study.

There were 217 babies who had a suitable radiograph of the mand-ible during the study period. Of these, 182 had suitable assessment of gestational age (LMP age that was confirmed by either Ballard’s scoring or ultrasound age). These 182 infants were therefore enrolled in the study. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) to look for the predictive ability of the appearance of 1st and 2nd molar teeth for estimation of gestational age. Infants were further grouped as being appropriate for gestational age (AGA) or SGA according to whether their weight at birth was above or below the 10th centile for age. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy in SGA and AGA babies were calculated separately using 2 × 2 tables.


(Table/Fig 1) shows the demographic characteristics of the study population. The gestational age ranged from 25 to 43 weeks, with the mean and median being 34 weeks. According to the study criteria, 16% were SGA.

(Table/Fig 4) and (Table/Fig 5) show the ROC curve for the 1st and 2nd molars, respectively. The area under the curve for the 1st molar was 0.933 (95% CI: 0.900 to 0.966) and that for the 2nd molar was 0.952 (95% CI: 0.920 to 0.983). For the 1st molar, the sensitivity was 96%, specificity 76.5%, PPV 88.4%, NPV 92%, and accuracy 89.5% in AGA babies (Table/Fig 2) ; in SGA babies, the sensitivity was 86.6%, specificity 88.8%, PPV 92.8%, NPV 80%, and accuracy 87.5% (Table/Fig 3) . For the 2nd molar, the sensitivity was 96%, specificity 90.6%, PPV 87.5%, NPV 97.1%, and accuracy 92.8% in AGA babies (Table/Fig 4); the sensitivity was 75%, specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 94.7%, and accuracy 95.4% in SGA babies (Table/Fig 5) .

(Table/Fig 4) shows the mean age of appearance of the 1st and 2nd molar teeth in AGA and SGA babies. The mean age of appearance of the 1st molar was 33.7 weeks in AGA babies and 35.45 weeks in the SGA group. The mean age of appearance of the 2nd molar was not very different in the two groups (38.12 weeks in AGA and 38.2 weeks in SGA babies). (Table/Fig 6),(Table/Fig 7),(Table/Fig 8),(Table/Fig 9),(Table/Fig 10),(Table/Fig 11).


We found that age at appearance of the deciduous molars on radiographs was useful for assessment of gestational age. The area under the ROC curve of 0.933 and 0.952 for the 1st and 2nd molars, respectively, suggests that this method has excellent discriminative ability in age assessment. Our findings using ROC curves confirms the findings of Kuhns et al., (18) This is arguably the largest study of gestational age assessment using tooth age. We used dates as per LMP, confirmed by another method (ultrasound estimation of gestational age or Ballard’s scoring), as the gold standard against which tooth age was compared. Kuhns et al., (18) had studied only European Caucasian infants with gestational age of 26–42 weeks. Our data shows that their findings also hold for Asian children. The study cohort of Kuhns et al. included 11 SGA babies; 10 of them had normal tooth mineralization and they had concluded that tooth age was not affected by being SGA. Our sample contained 29 SGA babies. Statistical analysis was done by comparing the SGA babies to AGA babies using 2 × 2 tables. The accuracy was only marginally different (±2 weeks) in the two groups. Kuhns et al. found tha tooth mineralization was consistent with gestational age in trisomy 21, retarded in trisomy 13-15, and accelerated by 5 weeks in trisomy 18. Our cohort did not include any babies with chromosomal aberrations. In a case of superfetation, where one of the twins was 32 weeks and the other 36 weeks at birth, we found that tooth age estimation, along with the Ballard’s score and ophthalmic examination, helped to corroborate the gestational age disparity that was first noticed during antenatal intra-uterine ultrasound examination (21). To the best of our knowledge, there are no other large studies with which we can compare our findings. It would appear that tooth age is a reliable method for the estimation of gestational age in infants between 33 and 37 weeks of gestation.


McCormick MC. The contribution of low birth weight to infant mortality and childhood morbidity. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 82-90.
Kramer MS, Demissie K, Yang H, Platt RW, Sauve R, Liston R. The contribution of mild and moderate preterm birth to infant mortality. Fetal and Infant Health study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System. JAMA 2000; 284: 843-49.
Finnström O. Studies on maturity in newborn infants. vi. Comparison between different methods for maturity estimation. Acta Paediat Scand 1972; 61: 33-41.
DiPietro JA and Allen MC. Estimation of gestational age: Implications for developmental research. Child Development 1991; 62: 1184-99.
Karn MN and Penrose LS. Birth weight and gestation time in relation to maternal age, parity and infant survival. Ann Eugen 1951-52; 16: 147.
Boyce A, Mayaux M, Schwartz D. Classical and true gestational postmaturity. Am J Obst Gynaecol 1976;125: 911-914.
Saito M, Yazawa K, Hashiguchi A, Kamasaka T, Nishi N, Kato K. Time of ovulation and prolonged pregnancy; Am J Obst Gynaecol 1972; 112: 31-38.
Hohler CW. Ultrasound estimation of gestational age. Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 1984; 27 :314-26.
Christie A, Martin M, Williams EL, Hudson G, Lanier JC. The estimation of fetal maturity by roentgen studies of osseous development. Am J Obst Gynaecol 1950; 60: 133-139.
Ballard JL, Khoury JC, Wedig k, Wang L, Eilers-Walsman BL and Lipp R. New Ballard Score, expanded to include extremely premature infants. Journal of Paediatrics; 1991;119: 417-23.
Oechsli FW. Ultrasound fetoscopy and IUGR. Two misused fashionable ideas. Pediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 1990; 4: 8-21.
Scott KE, Usher R. Epiphyseal development in fetal malnutrition syndrome. New Engl J Med 1964; 270: 822-24.
Hassan AI, Aref GH, Kassem AS. Congenital iodide induced goiter with hypothyroidism. Arch Dis Child 1968; 43: 702-704.
Finnström O. Studies on maturity in newborn infants. ii. External characteristics. Acta Paediatrica Scandinavica 1972; 81: 24.
Gruenwald P. Chronic fetal distress and placental insufficiency. Biol. Neonate (Basel) 1963; 5: 215.
Hittner HM, Hirsch NJ, & Rudolph AJ. Assessment of gestational age by examination of the anterior vascular capsule of the lens. Journal of Paediatrics 1977; 91: 455-58.
Krishnamohan VK, Wheeler MB, Testa MA, Phillips AF. Correlation of Post-natal regression of the anterior vascular capsule of the lens to gestational age. J Paediatr. Ophthalmol. Strabismus 1982; 19: 28-32.
Kuhns LR, Sherman MP, Poznanski AK. Determination of neonatal maturation on chest radiograph. Radiology 1972;102: 597-603.
Singh M. ‘Disorders of weight and gestation’ In Care of the Newborn. 5th edition. Sagar Publications. New Delhi. 2002 pp 224-44.
Khanna R, Taneja V. Singh SK, Kumar N, Sreenivas V, Puliyel JM. Clinical Risk Index of Babies Score in India. Indian J Paediatr 2002; 69: 957-67.
Baijal N, Sahni M, Verma N, Kumar A, Parkhe N, Puliyel JM. Discordant twins with the smaller twin appropriate for gestational age- unusual manifestation of superfoetation. A case report. BMC Paediatrics 2007; 7: 2

DOI and Others

Date of Submission: Jan 03, 2012
Date of Peer Review: Apr 01, 2012
Date of Acceptance: Apr 02, 2012
Date of Publishing: June 22, 2012

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)