ArticlePloS one2022
Birth weight reference for Japanese twins and risk factors for infant mortality: A population-based study.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Status of Low-Birth-Weight Infants in Japan.Cureus · 2025Article
- Neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies in Finland from 2008 to 2023.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is no standard birth weight curve for twins in Japan other than a prototype curve based on 1988-1991. Twins have a high perinatal mortality rate than singletons; therefore, we developed a new standard curve for twin birth weight using data from the 1995-2016 Vital Statistics and compared it with previous reports. We used 469,064 cases for analysis, excluding stillbirths and cases with missing values, and created a standard curve using LMS (statistical methods to vary the distribution by using skewness, median, and coefficient of variation) method. In comparison with previous reports, the mean birth weight decreased by 100-200 g. The groups with the lowest neonatal death rates (NDRs) and infant death rates (IDRs) were those with a birth weight of 1,500-2,499 g (NDR: 0.3%, IDR: 0.6%) and those born at 34-36 weeks (NDR: 0.2%, IDR: 0.4%). Compared to these, the IDR was significantly higher in the 2,500-3,999 g group and the 37-39 weeks group (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.1 in the 2,500-3,999 g group, IRR: 1.3 in the 37w0d-39w6d group). In particular, the risks of neonatal mortality and infant mortality were higher in infants born at a birth weight above 3,500 g. Infants born at a birth weight above 3,500 g may include recipients of twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. The most common causes of infant mortality are accidental death and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). We considered the possibility that infants treated as healthy newborns and whose mothers were discharged from the hospital without adequate twin care guidance may be more likely to experience unintentional accidents and SIDS at home. The present study suggested that creating a new twin birth weight standard curve and guidance on managing twins at home for full-term and normal birth weight infants may lead to a reduction in infant deaths.
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.