ArticlePaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2022
The validity of self-reported SARS-CoV-2 results among postpartum respondents.
Article in Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acceptability and usability of COVID-19 antigen self-test in populations under socioeconomic vulnerability in Brazil: A cross-sectional study.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Post-Acute COVID-19 Effects on Diagnostic Conversion Rates And Standardized Cognitive and Motor Test Scores in a Longitudinal Study of Independent, Community-Recruited Elderly Subjects.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Exposure to prenatal infection and the development of internalizing and externalizing problems in children: a longitudinal population-based study.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2024Article
- Long-term effects of prenatal infection on the human brain: a prospective multimodal neuroimaging study.Translational psychiatry · 2023Article
- Predictors of reinfection with pre-Omicron and Omicron variants of concern among individuals who recovered from COVID-19 in the first year of the pandemic.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2023Article
- Association of initial COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy with subsequent vaccination among pregnant and postpartum individuals.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
- The validity of self-reported SARS-CoV-2 results among postpartum respondents.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRapid and reliable health data on SARS-CoV-2 infection among pregnant individuals are needed to understand the influence of the virus on maternal health and child development, yet the validity of self-reported COVID-19 testing and diagnosis remains unknown.
objectivesWe assessed the validity of self-reported COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and diagnosis during delivery among postpartum respondents as well as how diagnostic accuracy varied by respondent characteristics.
methodsWe validated receipt of a COVID-19 PCR test and test results by comparing self-reported results obtained through an electronic survey to electronic medical record data (gold standard) among a cross-sectional sample of postpartum respondents who delivered at four New York City hospitals between March 2020 and January 2021. To assess validity, we calculated each indicator's sensitivity, specificity and the area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC). We examined respondent characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, education level, health insurance, nativity, pre-pregnancy obesity and birth characteristics) as predictors of reporting accuracy using modified Poisson regression.
resultsA total of 276 respondents had matched electronic record and survey data. The majority, 83.7% of respondents received a SARS-CoV-2 PCR test during their delivery stay. Of these, 12.1% had detected SARS-CoV-2. Among those tested, sensitivity (90.5%) and specificity (96.5%) were high for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The adjusted risk ratio (aRR) of accurate result reporting was somewhat lower among Hispanic women relative to white non-Hispanic women (aRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.90, 1.00) and among those who had public or no insurance vs. private (aRR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82, 1.01), controlling for recall time. CONCLUSION(S): High recall accuracy result reporting for COVID-19 PCR tests administered during labour and delivery suggest the potential for population-based surveys as a rapid mechanism to obtain accurate data on COVID-19 diagnostic history. Additional psychometric research is warranted to ensure accurate recall across respondent subgroups.
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.