Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31639369›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2020

Pregnant? Validity of the pregnancy checkbox on death certificates in four states, and characteristics associated with pregnancy checkbox errors.

Andrea Catalano, Nicole L Davis, Emily E Petersen, Christopher Harrison, Lyn Kieltyka, Mei You, Elizabeth J Conrey, Alexander C Ewing, William M Callaghan, David A Goodman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Trends in maternal mortality rates by state, United States, 2018 to 2023.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea CatalanoDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Nicole L DavisDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Emily E PetersenDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Christopher HarrisonOffice of Vital Records, Georgia Department of Public Health, Atlanta, GA.
Lyn KieltykaDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA; Bureau of Family Health, Louisiana Office of Public Health, New Orleans, LA.
Mei YouDivision of Vital Records and Health Statistics, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Lansing, MI.
Elizabeth J ConreyDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA; Bureau of Maternal, Child and Family Health, Ohio Department of Health, Columbus, OH.
Alexander C EwingDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
William M CallaghanDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
David A GoodmanDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA. Electronic address: igc4@cdc.gov.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USGeorgia Department of Public Health · USMaternal Child and Family Health · USMichigan Department of Health and Human Services · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaternal mortality rates in the United States appear to be increasing. One potential reason may be increased identification of maternal deaths after the addition of a pregnancy checkbox to the death certificate. In 2016, 4 state health departments (Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, and Ohio) implemented a pregnancy checkbox quality assurance pilot, with technical assistance provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The pilot aimed to improve accuracy of the pregnancy checkbox on death certificates and resultant state maternal mortality estimates.

objectiveTo estimate the validity of the pregnancy checkbox on the death certificate, and to describe characteristics associated with errors using 2016 data from a 4-state quality assurance pilot. MATERIALS AND

methodsPotential pregnancy-associated deaths were identified by linking death certificates with birth or fetal death certificates from within 1 year preceding death or by pregnancy checkbox status. Death certificates that indicated that the decedent was pregnant within 1 year of death via the pregnancy checkbox, but that did not link to a birth or fetal death certificate, were referred for active follow-up to confirm pregnancy status by either death certifier confirmation or medical record review. Descriptive statistics and 95% confidence intervals were used to examine the distributions of demographic characteristics by pregnancy confirmation category (confirmed pregnant, confirmed not pregnant, and unable to confirm). We compared the proportion confirmed pregnant and confirmed not pregnant within age, race/ethnicity, pregnancy checkbox category, and certifier type categories using a Wald test of proportions. Binomial and Poisson regression models were used to estimate prevalence ratios for having an incorrect pregnancy checkbox (false positive, false negative) by age group, race/ethnicity, pregnancy checkbox category, and certifier type.

resultsAmong 467 potential pregnancy-associated deaths, 335 (72%) were confirmed pregnant via linkage to a birth or fetal death certificate, certifier confirmation, or review of medical records. A total of 97 women (21%) were confirmed not pregnant (false positives) and 35 (7%) were unable to be confirmed. Women confirmed pregnant were significantly younger than women confirmed not pregnant (P < .001). Deaths certified by coroners and medical examiners were more likely to be confirmed pregnant than confirmed not pregnant (P = .04). The association between decedent age category and false-positive status followed a dose-response relationship (P < .001), with increasing prevalence ratios for each increase in age category. Death certificates of non-Hispanic black women were more likely to be false positive, compared with non-Hispanic white women (prevalence ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.01, 1.96). The sensitivity of the pregnancy checkbox among these 4 states in 2016 was 62% and the positive predictive value was 68%.

conclusionWe provide a multi-state analysis of the validity of the pregnancy checkbox and highlight a need for more accurate reporting of pregnancy status on death certificates. States and other jurisdictions may increase the accuracy of their data used to calculate maternal mortality rates by implementing quality assurance processes.

Indexed as

Death CertificatesMaternal MortalityAdultCoroners and Medical ExaminersFemaleHumansMaternal DeathMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPregnancyUnited Statesmaternal healthmaternal mortalitypregnancy checkboxquality assurancequality improvement

Identifiers

PMID31639369
PMCPMC7056489
OpenAlexW2981217866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.