Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31111944›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2019

Comparison of Parametric and Nonparametric Estimators for the Association Between Incident Prepregnancy Obesity and Stillbirth in a Population-Based Cohort Study.

Ya-Hui Yu, Lisa M Bodnar, Maria M Brooks, Katherine P Himes, Ashley I Naimi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ya-Hui YuDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Lisa M BodnarDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Maria M BrooksDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Katherine P HimesDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Ashley I NaimiDepartment of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Funding

Maternal obesity, weight gain, and the black-white disparity in pregnancy outcomeR21HD065807 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BODNAR, LISA M · 2011 to 2012
$443k
Maternal obesity, weight gain and the black-white disparity in stillbirthR21HD067851 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BODNAR, LISA M · 2011 to 2012
$427k
NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD065807NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD067851
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While prepregnancy obesity increases risk of stillbirth, few studies have evaluated the role of newly developed obesity independent of long-standing obesity. Additionally, researchers have relied almost exclusively on parametric models, which require correct specification of an unknown function for consistent estimation. We estimated the association between incident obesity and stillbirth in a cohort constructed from linked birth and death records in Pennsylvania (2003-2013). Incident obesity was defined as body mass index (weight (kg)/height (m)2) greater than or equal to 30. We used parametric G-computation, semiparametric inverse-probability weighting, and parametric/nonparametric targeted minimum loss-based estimation (TMLE) to estimate the association between incident prepregnancy obesity and stillbirth. Compared with pregnancies from women who stayed nonobese, women who became obese prior to their next pregnancy were estimated to have 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.5, 3.5) more stillbirths per 1,000 pregnancies using parametric G-computation. However, despite well-behaved stabilized inverse probability weights, risk differences estimated from inverse-probability weighting, nonparametric TMLE, and parametric TMLE represented 6.9 (95% CI: 3.7, 10.0), 0.4 (95% CI: 0.1, 0.7), and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.5, 4.2) excess stillbirths per 1,000 pregnancies, respectively. These results, particularly those derived from nonparametric TMLE, were highly sensitive to covariates included in the propensity score models. Our results suggest that caution is warranted when using nonparametric estimators to quantify exposure effects.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAdultFemaleHumansIncidenceObesityPennsylvaniaPregnancyRisk FactorsStillbirthnonparametric estimationobesitypregnancystillbirthtargeted minimum loss-based estimation

Identifiers

PMID31111944
PMCPMC6657564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.