ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)
Excess Hispanic fetal-infant mortality in a midwestern community.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perinatal Periods of Risk Analysis: Disentangling Race and Socioeconomic Status to Inform a Black Infant Mortality Community Action Initiative.Maternal and child health journal · 2017Article
- Very low birth weight and perinatal periods of risk: disparities in St. Louis.BioMed research international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe assessed excess fetal-infant mortality for Hispanic, non-Hispanic white, and non-Hispanic black populations in five contiguous counties of Missouri and Kansas.
methodsWe conducted a perinatal periods of risk (PPOR) assessment of fetal-infant mortality using electronic linked birth-death record files from 2001 through 2005. We generated an internal reference group in accordance with established PPOR protocol. We used Kitagawa analysis to determine whether excess deaths were due to birthweight distribution (a higher frequency of prematurity or growth retardation) or to higher mortality rates once born at that birthweight (birthweight-specific mortality).
resultsWe found the excess fetal-infant death rates for Hispanic and non-Hispanic white populations to be similar and considerably lower than that for non-Hispanic black populations. Among Hispanic children, we judged 21.6% of fetal-infant mortality to be excess in relation to the reference population. Within the PPOR matrix, Hispanic excess mortality rates were distributed differently from those of non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black populations. Among Hispanic children, 93.6% of the excess mortality could be explained by low birthweight and birthweight-specific mortality, with the greatest contribution attributable to low birthweight.
conclusionThe excess fetal-infant mortality experience of Hispanic people in the five-county region was similar to that of the non-Hispanic white population, but was distributed differently in the PPOR model, which has significance regarding interventions targeting reductions in fetal-infant mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.