ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
The association of Chinese and American antenatal care utilization indices with birth outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An interpretable machine learning model for predicting NICU admission in preterm infants: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Few comparisons have been implemented between different prenatal care utilization indices and their effects on adverse outcomes. This study investigated the appropriateness of Chinese antenatal care (ANC) regulations and compared Chinese and American adequacy of prenatal care utilization (APNCU) scores. Methods: From 2010 to 2022, the medical records of 60,114 pregnant women were collected from the electronic medical record system (EMRS) in Zhoushan, China. ANC utilization was measured using the APNCU score and five times antenatal care (ANC5). Birth weight outcomes, including small for gestational age (SGA) and large for gestational age (LGA), low birth weight (LBW), macrosomia, birth weight, and preterm birth (PTB), were utilized as outcomes. Multinomial, linear, and logistic regression were used to analyze the association of ANC5 and APNCU with outcomes, respectively. Crossover analysis was implemented to compare the interaction between ANC5 and APNCU on the outcomes. Results: Women who received inadequate prenatal care had increased odds for PTB (ANC5: odds ratio (OR) = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 1.03-1.21; APNCU: OR = 1.18, 95%CI: 1.07-1.29), delivering SGA infants (ANC5: OR = 1.13, 95%CI = 1.07-1.21; APNCU: OR = 1.11, 95%CI = 1.03-1.20). Crossover analysis revealed that inadequate prenatal care in APNCU only was significantly associated with an increased risk of PTB (OR = 1.48, 95%CI: 1.26-1.73). Conclusion: Women with inadequate prenatal care in ANC5 or APNCU were more likely to suffer from adverse birth outcomes, including PTB, birth weight loss, SGA, and LBW. It indicated that adequate prenatal care is necessary for pregnant women. However, there were interactions between ANC5 and APNCU on PTB, with inadequate prenatal care use by APNCU showing the highest risk of PTB. This indicates that APNCU would be a better tool for evaluating prenatal care use.
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.