Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31371291›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Joint contribution of socioeconomic circumstances and ethnic group to variations in preterm birth, neonatal mortality and infant mortality in England and Wales: a population-based retrospective cohort study using routine data from 2006 to 2012.

Charles Opondo, Ron Gray, Jennifer Hollowell, Yangmei Li, Jennifer J Kurinczuk, Maria A Quigley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Disparities in Stillbirths in England: Analysis of A Population-Based Study of 1.3 Million Births.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Charles OpondoPolicy Research Unit in Maternal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK charles.opondo@npeu.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8155-4117
Ron GrayPolicy Research Unit in Maternal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jennifer HollowellPolicy Research Unit in Maternal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Yangmei LiPolicy Research Unit in Maternal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jennifer J KurinczukPolicy Research Unit in Maternal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Maria A QuigleyPolicy Research Unit in Maternal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aimed to describe the variation in risks of adverse birth outcomes across ethnic groups and socioeconomic circumstances, and to explore the evidence of mediation by socioeconomic circumstances of the effect of ethnicity on birth outcomes.

settingEngland and Wales.

participantsThe data came from the 4.6 million singleton live births between 2006 and 2012. EXPOSURE: The main exposure was ethnic group. Socioeconomic circumstances, the hypothesised mediator, were measured using the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), an area-level measure of deprivation, based on the mother's place of residence. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were birth outcomes, namely: neonatal death, infant death and preterm birth. We estimated the slope and relative indices of inequality to describe differences in birth outcomes across IMD, and the proportion of the variance in birth outcomes across ethnic groups attributable to IMD. We investigated mediation by IMD on birth outcomes across ethnic groups using structural equation modelling.

resultsNeonatal mortality, infant mortality and preterm birth risks were 2.1 per 1000, 3.2 per 1000 and 5.6%, respectively. Babies in the most deprived areas had 47%-129% greater risk of adverse birth outcomes than those in the least deprived areas. Minority ethnic babies had 48%-138% greater risk of adverse birth outcomes compared with white British babies. Up to a third of the variance in birth outcomes across ethnic groups was attributable to differences in IMD, and there was strong statistical evidence of an indirect effect through IMD in the effect of ethnicity on birth outcomes.

conclusionThere is evidence that socioeconomic circumstances could be contributing to the differences in birth outcomes across ethnic groups.

Indexed as

AdultBangladeshBlack PeopleCaribbean RegionEnglandFemaleHumansIndiaInfantInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornMaleMaternal AgeMinority GroupsPakistanPremature Birtharea deprivationethnicityIMDinfant mortalitymediationneonatal mortalityNS-SECpreterm birthsocioeconomic circumstances

Identifiers

PMID31371291
PMCPMC6677942

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.