ArticleBMC public health2026
Socioeconomic inequalities in maternal infections during pregnancy: administrative health data evidence from a large UK urban area with high levels of inequality.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMaternal infections during pregnancy (also known as prenatal infections) have been linked to adverse outcomes such as low birthweight, preterm birth, stillbirth and child developmental concerns, all of which have known socioeconomic inequalities. However, there is currently a lack of research into potential links between socioeconomic factors and prevalence of prenatal infections.
methodsWe utilised linked administrative health data including all children born in a large UK urban area with high levels of inequality, i.e. the National Health Service (NHS) health board of Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland, 2010-2015 (N = 92,094). Logistic regression models were used to examine associations between socioeconomic factors (i.e. area-based Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintiles and household-based UK National Statistics Socioeconomic Classification (NS-SEC)), and odds of prenatal infections, measured as hospital-diagnosed prenatal infections and infection-related prescriptions, with and without controlling for covariates.
resultsArea-based deprivation was generally associated with greater odds of prenatal infections, particularly for infections diagnosed in hospital. For example, living in a 'most deprived' SIMD quintile area was associated increased odds of both hospital-diagnosed prenatal infections (odds ratio (OR): 1.77; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.48, 2.11) and infection-related prescriptions during pregnancy (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.21, 1.36), when compared to living in a 'least deprived' SIMD quintile area, after covariate adjustment. Meanwhile, lower NS-SEC was also generally associated with increased odds of hospital-diagnosed prenatal infections, but there was not a clear pattern in associations between NS-SEC and infection-related prescriptions.
conclusionsArea-based deprivation, and to a lesser extent, lower household NS-SEC, appear to be associated with increased odds of maternal infections (particularly hospital-diagnosed maternal infections) during pregnancy in NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland. Socioeconomic inequalities in the prevalence of prenatal infections may therefore be a potential contributing factor to wider inequalities.
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.