Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28220656›Full record

ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2017

Impact of stillbirths on international comparisons of preterm birth rates: a secondary analysis of the WHO multi-country survey of Maternal and Newborn Health.

N Morisaki, T Ganchimeg, J P Vogel, J Zeitlin, J G Cecatti, J P Souza, C Pileggi Castro, M R Torloni, E Ota, R Mori and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in Latin America and the Caribbean: systematic review and meta-analysis.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 15 institutions in 9 countries.

N MorisakiDepartment of Social Medicine, National Center for Child Health and Research, Tokyo, Japan.
T GanchimegDepartment of Global Health Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
J P VogelUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
J ZeitlinPerinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Research Team, Center for Epidemiology and Statistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, DHU Risks in Pregnancy, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France.
J G CecattiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
J P SouzaDepartment of Social Medicine, Ribeirao Preto Medical School, University of Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
C Pileggi CastroDepartment of Pediatrics, Ribeirao Preto Medical School, University of Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
M R TorloniEvidence Based Healthcare Post-graduate Program, Sao Paulo Federal University, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
E OtaGlobal Health Nursing, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke's International University, Tokyo, Japan.
R MoriDepartment of Health Policy, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan.
S M DolanDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Women's Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
S ToughDepartments of Paediatrics and Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
S MittalDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Fortis Memorial Research Institute, Gurgaon, India.
V BatagliaDepartment of Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Perinatology Central Hospital, Social Security Institute, Asuncion, Paraguay.
B YadamsurenNational Center for Communicable Diseases, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
M S KramerDepartments of Pediatrics and of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University Faculty of Medicine, Montreal, QC, Canada.
PREBIC Epidemiology Working Group and the WHO-MCS Research Network
National Center For Child Health and Development · JPClinics Hospital of Ribeirão Preto · BRFortis Memorial Research Institute · INIPS Central · PYMcGill University · CAMontefiore Medical Center · USNational Center for Communicable Diseases · MNSt. Luke's International University · JPTsukuba University of Technology · JPUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BRUniversité Paris Cité · FRUniversity of Calgary · CAWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the extent to which stillbirths affect international comparisons of preterm birth rates in low- and middle-income countries.

designSecondary analysis of a multi-country cross-sectional study.

setting29 countries participating in the World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health. POPULATION: 258 215 singleton deliveries in 286 hospitals.

methodsWe describe how inclusion or exclusion of stillbirth affect rates of preterm births in 29 countries.

main outcome measuresPreterm delivery.

resultsIn all countries, preterm birth rates were substantially lower when based on live births only, than when based on total births. However, the increase in preterm birth rates with inclusion of stillbirths was substantially higher in low Human Development Index (HDI) countries [median 18.2%, interquartile range (17.2-34.6%)] compared with medium (4.3%, 3.0-6.7%), and high-HDI countries (4.8%, 4.4-5.5%).

conclusionInclusion of stillbirths leads to higher estimates of preterm birth rate in all countries, with a disproportionately large effect in low-HDI countries. Preterm birth rates based on live births alone do not accurately reflect international disparities in perinatal health; thus improved registration and reporting of stillbirths are necessary. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Inclusion of stillbirths increases preterm birth rates estimates, especially in low-HDI countries.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGlobal HealthHealth SurveysHumansPregnancyPremature BirthStillbirthWorld Health OrganizationGlobal healthlow income countryperinatal healthpreterm birthstillbirth

Identifiers

PMID28220656
PMCPMC5573985
OpenAlexW2589851978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.