Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35437839›Full record

ArticlePaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2022

Participation in survey research among mothers with a recent live birth: A comparison of mothers with living versus deceased infants - Findings from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, 2016-2019.

Katherine Kortsmit, Holly Shulman, Ruben A Smith, Carrie K Shapiro-Mendoza, Sharyn E Parks, Suzanne Folger, Maura Whiteman, Leslie Harrison, Shanna Cox, Lauren Christiansen-Lindquist and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katherine KortsmitDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7972-9117
Holly ShulmanDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Ruben A SmithDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Carrie K Shapiro-MendozaDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sharyn E ParksDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Suzanne FolgerDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Maura WhitemanDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Leslie HarrisonDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Shanna CoxDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Lauren Christiansen-LindquistDepartment of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Wanda D BarfieldDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Lee WarnerDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USEmory University · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite high infant mortality rates in the United States relative to other developed countries, little is known about survey participation among mothers of deceased infants.

objectiveTo assess differences in survey response, contact and cooperation rates for mothers of deceased versus. living infants at the time of survey mailing (approximately 2-6 months postpartum), overall and by select maternal and infant characteristics.

methodsWe analysed 2016-2019 data for 50 sites from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), a site-specific, population-based surveillance system of mothers with a recent live birth. We assessed differences in survey participation between mothers of deceased and living infants. Using American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) standard definitions and terminology, we calculated proportions of mothers who participated and were successfully contacted among sampled mothers (weighted response and contact rates, respectively), and who participated among contacted mothers (weighted cooperation rate). We then constructed multivariable survey-weighted logistic regression models to examine the adjusted association between infant vital status and weighted response, contact and cooperation rates, within strata of maternal and infant characteristics.

resultsAmong sampled mothers, 0.3% (weighted percentage, n = 2795) of infants had records indicating they were deceased at the time of survey mailing and 99.7% (weighted percentage, n = 344,379) did not. Mothers of deceased infants had lower unadjusted weighted response (48.3% vs. 56.2%), contact (67.9% vs. 74.3%) and cooperation rates (71.1% vs. 75.6%). However, after adjusting for covariates, differences in survey participation by infant vital status were reduced.

conclusionsAfter covariate adjustment, differences in PRAMS participation rates were attenuated. However, participation rates among mothers of deceased infants remain two to four percentage points lower compared with mothers of living infants. Strategies to increase PRAMS participation could inform knowledge about experiences and behaviours before, during and shortly after pregnancy to help reduce infant mortality.

Indexed as

Live BirthMothersFemaleHumansInfantPopulation SurveillancePregnancyRisk AssessmentSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Statesinfant mortalityPRAMSpregnancyresponse ratessurvey participation

Identifiers

PMID35437839
PMCPMC10044386
OpenAlexW4224218698

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.