ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Intellectual and developmental disability diagnoses in California delivery records and adverse maternal outcomes.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Women with intellectual and developmental disability (IDD) are a population whose maternal health outcomes remain poorly documented. We estimated associations between maternal IDD diagnosis in California birth records and adverse maternal outcomes, and assessed whether prenatal clinical characteristics mediate these relationships. Methods: This retrospective population-based cohort study included all deliveries ≥22 weeks' gestation in California between 2007 and 2021, using birth and fetal death certificates linked to inpatient and emergency department records. Outcomes included severe maternal morbidity (SMM), cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, and maternal hospital admission in the year following delivery. We calculated adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) matched on maternal age and year of delivery. We examined IDD as a single category and by subtype: autism spectrum disorder (ASD), cerebral palsy (CP), intellectual disability (ID), chromosomal differences, and other IDDs. Mediators included tobacco use, pre-existing hypertension, pre-existing diabetes, preeclampsia, prepregnancy body mass index, epilepsy, depression/anxiety, bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, and adequate prenatal care. Results: Among 6,435,742 singleton births, 4492 mothers (0.07%) had an IDD diagnosis. Women with IDD faced elevated risks across all adverse outcomes compared to those without: SMM-aRR: 2.77, 95% CI: 2.40, 3.19; cesarean delivery-aRR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.39, 1.50; preeclampsia-aRR: 2.52, 95% CI: 2.30, 2.77; and hospital admission within 1 year of delivery-aRR: 4.64, 95% CI: 4.26, 5.05. While risk was elevated for all subtypes across all outcomes, ID tended to confer the highest risk. In the mediation analysis, hypertensive disorders and mental health conditions were the strongest individual mediators. In a joint mediation analysis, select perinatal characteristics explained half of the excess risk of cesarean delivery (autism), preeclampsia (autism), hospital admission (ID), and SMM (ID). Conclusions: Women with IDD documented in California birth records face substantially elevated risks of adverse maternal outcomes, with the largest disparities in hospital admission in the year following delivery. Hypertensive disorders, depression, and anxiety were the strongest potential mediators of those analyzed, and should be further evaluated as intervention targets. Given our reliance on inpatient diagnostic codes, findings may generalize most reliably to women with IDD with the highest support needs.
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.