Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36879081›Full record

ArticlePediatric research2023

Trends in fetal and neonatal outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alabama.

Vivek V Shukla, A K M Fazlur Rahman, Xuejun Shen, Allison Black, Nitin Arora, C Vivek Lal, Edward F Bell, Arie Nakhmani, Chengcui Zhang, Namasivayam Ambalavanan and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Vivek V ShuklaUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. vshukla@uabmc.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1580-1049
A K M Fazlur RahmanUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Xuejun ShenAlabama Department of Public Health, Montgomery, AL, USA.
Allison BlackUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Nitin AroraUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
C Vivek LalUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Edward F BellUniversity of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Arie NakhmaniUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0987-4834
Chengcui ZhangUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Namasivayam AmbalavananUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Waldemar A CarloUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
University of Alabama at Birmingham · USAlabama Department of Public Health · USUniversity of Iowa · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current study evaluated the hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with higher stillbirth but lower neonatal mortality rates.

methodsWe compared three epochs: baseline (2016-2019, January-December, weeks 1-52, and 2020, January-February, weeks 1-8), initial pandemic (2020, March-December, weeks 9-52, and 2021, January-June, weeks 1-26), and delta pandemic (2021, July-September, weeks 27-39) periods, using Alabama Department of Public Health database including deliveries with stillbirths ≥20 weeks or live births ≥22 weeks gestation. The primary outcomes were stillbirth and neonatal mortality rates.

resultsA total of 325,036 deliveries were included (236,481 from baseline, 74,076 from initial pandemic, and 14,479 from delta pandemic period). The neonatal mortality rate was lower in the pandemic periods (4.4 to 3.5 and 3.6/1000 live births, in the baseline, initial, and delta pandemic periods, respectively, p < 0.01), but the stillbirth rate did not differ (9 to 8.5 and 8.6/1000 births, p = 0.41). On interrupted time-series analyses, there were no significant changes in either stillbirth (p = 0.11 for baseline vs. initial pandemic period, and p = 0.67 for baseline vs. delta pandemic period) or neonatal mortality rates (p = 0.28 and 0.89, respectively).

conclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic periods were not associated with a significant change in stillbirth and neonatal mortality rates compared to the baseline period. IMPACT: The COVID-19 pandemic could have resulted in changes in fetal and neonatal outcomes. However, only a few population-based studies have compared the risk of fetal and neonatal mortality in the pandemic period to the baseline period. This population-based study identifies the changes in fetal and neonatal outcomes during the initial and delta COVID-19 pandemic period as compared to the baseline period. The current study shows that stillbirth and neonatal mortality rates were not significantly different in the initial and delta COVID-19 pandemic periods as compared to the baseline period.

Indexed as

COVID-19StillbirthAlabamaFemaleHumansInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornPandemicsPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID36879081
PMCPMC9988197
OpenAlexW4323306270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.