ArticleBMC public health2026
The association between the provision of recommendations for stillbirth prevention and the stillbirth reduction: a regional population-based study in Japan.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundShiga Prefecture in Japan still had higher stillbirth rates than the national average before 2010. To improve stillbirth rates in Shiga, we have informed both obstetricians and pregnant women in our region of recommendations for stillbirth prevention after peer-reviewing all stillbirth cases in Shiga since 2013. We, therefore, evaluated the reduction in the stillbirth rate and preventable stillbirths in Shiga after the intervention.
methodsThis was a population-based study in Shiga Prefecture, Japan. We assessed outcomes over 15 years divided into three 5-year periods: before- (2008-12), early- (2013-17), and late-intervention (2018-22) period. The primary outcome was the rate of stillbirth in Shiga, and the secondary outcome was the rate of preventable stillbirth in each period.
resultsThe stillbirth rate in Shiga significantly decreased by 40% in the late-intervention period compared to that in the before-intervention period (95% CI: (−52%, (−24%), and it also significantly decreased compared to the national average between those periods (rate ratio: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.96). It improved to the second lowest level in Japan during the late-intervention period. The rate of possibly preventable stillbirths in the late-intervention was significantly lower than that in the before-intervention period.
conclusionsInforming healthcare providers and pregnant women of the recommendations for stillbirth prevention was associated with a reduction in stillbirths.
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.