Curiosity again nubs

[True Blue]

This isn't about my 'possible' :D nub pic or anyone elses it's just curiosity.

What dates are more important for nub guessing, the date baby is measuring or the date from confirmed ovulation?

If you know from ovulation baby measures 12+4 and ultrasound measures baby 13+2 for example. Which date would be more important for nub guessing?

Thanks :oops:

[harleyquinn]

I am curious about this too but going the other way. My nuchal scan is tomorrow and I will be 12.2 days from dates of ovulation and LMP but baby measueres about 4-5 days behind so thats kind of rubbish for a nub shot in the 11thweek but the baby is not *really* in the 11th week. (not possible) Hope that made sense.

[Kiara]

Im wondering the same!

[Wanting-a-girl]

There was a study posted a week or two ago about what the baby was measuring in mm and nib progression

[True Blue]

I'll have a look for it :)

[hotdogz&boyz]

I believe measurement at the time of the scan is more important. The study stickied at the top of this page, the bigger baby measured in mm, the more accurate the nub angle-gender relation was. It did somewhat correlate with age. But I think a "measuring large 12-week nub" would be more accurate than a measuring on time 12-week nub. But I could be reading the study wrong, I suppose.

[True Blue]

Thank you hotdogz&boyz I can't find the study :D but you answered the question ;)

[Mum to three girls]

I always thought that the maturity of the baby would be more important. An 11 week fetus will still do 11 week developmental things, even if it measures 12 ish weeks. We're a unique group of women in that we generally know when we ovulated but for the purpose of studies at this gestation I imagine it would be common to use size as a marker of age because over the population it's prob more accurate.

[True Blue]

Mum to three girls I think that makes more sense. Measuring ahead maybe wouldn't = developing ahead too, or so you would think!

[Mrs_P]

i have always thought it was to do with the development of the baby. Some babies are bigger than others and ultra sound is a good way to date pregnancy and probably more accurate than assuming ov at a set date. But early u/s's have moved all of my babies due dates but the last two i have known to within a day or so due to opk's and other factors. With my last they move me by 6 days but then he was 8 days late!

With this little one i measured slightly behind when (a day or two) when i had my 7 week scan but by 13 weeks was measuring 4 days ahead - babe must have had a growth spurt but i took my nub measurements to be 12+1 (not 12+5) as i knew my dates weren't that far out.

[Rainbow baby]

I remember the study were the measuring was being used for accuracy of the nub. If you think about it... it is the only was to estimate gestation and most women don't know when they ovulated anyway!! For me I think when you know you ovulated as I knew I ovulated and when I conceived ds3!! I was sure I was a week behind what they told me at my nt scan!! They told me 13 weeks and I thought from when I Ovulated I would be just under 12 weeks!! Well let me just say my tech said girl and I had a pretty girly looking nub shot and gave birth to my 3rd son :) I still believe it was because they gave me the wrong dates and the nub just didn't have the maturity to have worked its way up!! That's just my opinion anyway!! I only have little baby's yet all 4 of my son's measured a week later at the NT scan regardless of dates! I know for sure with the last two when I oed the first two I was not charting and with my first they induced me because I was late from scans and when he was born they said he looked under or just cooked and had a few breathing issues! So in yapping on about al that my opinion is if you "know" for sure without any doubt I would go with that!!

[kaseybaby]

I believe if you are sure of your ovulation date, then it is more accurate to go by that then the measurements. But this is my very unscientific knowledge ;)