Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Clarity and consistency in stillbirth reporting in Europe: why is it so hard to get this right

M. Gissler, M. Durox, L. Smith, B. Blondel, L. Broeders, A. Hindori-Mohangoo, K. Kearns, R. Kolarova, M. Loghi, U. Rodin, K. Szamotulska, P. Velebil, G. Weber, O. Zurriaga, J. Zeitlin, Euro-Peristat Research Network

. 2022 ; 32 (2) : 200-206. [pub] 20220401

Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22018956

BACKGROUND: Stillbirth is a major public health problem, but measurement remains a challenge even in high-income countries. We compared routine stillbirth statistics in Europe reported by Eurostat with data from the Euro-Peristat research network. METHODS: We used data on stillbirths in 2015 from both sources for 31 European countries. Stillbirth rates per 1000 total births were analyzed by gestational age (GA) and birthweight groups. Information on termination of pregnancy at ≥22 weeks' GA was analyzed separately. RESULTS: Routinely collected stillbirth rates were higher than those reported by the research network. For stillbirths with a birthweight ≥500 g, the difference between the mean rates of the countries for Eurostat and Euro-Peristat data was 22% [4.4/1000, versus 3.5/1000, mean difference 0.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-1.0]. When using a birthweight threshold of 1000 g, this difference was smaller, 12% (2.9/1000, versus 2.5/1000, mean difference 0.4 with 95% CI 0.3-0.5), but substantial differences remained for individual countries. In Euro-Peristat, missing data on birthweight ranged from 0% to 29% (average 5.0%) and were higher than missing data for GA (0-23%, average 1.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Routine stillbirth data for European countries in international databases are not comparable and should not be used for benchmarking or surveillance without careful verification with other sources. Recommendations for improvement include using a cut-off based on GA, excluding late terminations of pregnancy and linking multiple sources to improve the quality of national databases.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22018956
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220804135220.0
007      
ta
008      
220720s2022 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1093/eurpub/ckac001 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)35157046
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Gissler, Mika $u THL Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland and Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden $1 https://orcid.org/0000000182547525
245    10
$a Clarity and consistency in stillbirth reporting in Europe: why is it so hard to get this right / $c M. Gissler, M. Durox, L. Smith, B. Blondel, L. Broeders, A. Hindori-Mohangoo, K. Kearns, R. Kolarova, M. Loghi, U. Rodin, K. Szamotulska, P. Velebil, G. Weber, O. Zurriaga, J. Zeitlin, Euro-Peristat Research Network
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Stillbirth is a major public health problem, but measurement remains a challenge even in high-income countries. We compared routine stillbirth statistics in Europe reported by Eurostat with data from the Euro-Peristat research network. METHODS: We used data on stillbirths in 2015 from both sources for 31 European countries. Stillbirth rates per 1000 total births were analyzed by gestational age (GA) and birthweight groups. Information on termination of pregnancy at ≥22 weeks' GA was analyzed separately. RESULTS: Routinely collected stillbirth rates were higher than those reported by the research network. For stillbirths with a birthweight ≥500 g, the difference between the mean rates of the countries for Eurostat and Euro-Peristat data was 22% [4.4/1000, versus 3.5/1000, mean difference 0.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-1.0]. When using a birthweight threshold of 1000 g, this difference was smaller, 12% (2.9/1000, versus 2.5/1000, mean difference 0.4 with 95% CI 0.3-0.5), but substantial differences remained for individual countries. In Euro-Peristat, missing data on birthweight ranged from 0% to 29% (average 5.0%) and were higher than missing data for GA (0-23%, average 1.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Routine stillbirth data for European countries in international databases are not comparable and should not be used for benchmarking or surveillance without careful verification with other sources. Recommendations for improvement include using a cut-off based on GA, excluding late terminations of pregnancy and linking multiple sources to improve the quality of national databases.
650    _2
$a porodní hmotnost $7 D001724
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a gestační stáří $7 D005865
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a příjem $7 D007182
650    _2
$a těhotenství $7 D011247
650    12
$a narození mrtvého plodu $x epidemiologie $7 D050497
651    _2
$a Evropa $x epidemiologie $7 D005060
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Durox, Mélanie $u Université de Paris, CRESS, Obstetrical Perinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Research Team (EPOPé), INSERM, INRA, Paris, F-75004, France
700    1_
$a Smith, Lucy $u Department of Health Sciences, College of Life Sciences, University of Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
700    1_
$a Blondel, Béatrice $u THL Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland and Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
700    1_
$a Broeders, Lisa $u The Netherlands Perinatal Registry (Perined), Utrecht, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Hindori-Mohangoo, Ashna $u Foundation for Perinatal Interventions and Research in Suriname (PeriSur), Paramaribo, Suriname $u Tulane University, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, USA
700    1_
$a Kearns, Karen $u National Finance Division, Healthcare Pricing Office, HSE, Dublin
700    1_
$a Kolarova, Rumyana $u Ministry of Health of Bulgaria, Sofia, Bulgaria
700    1_
$a Loghi, Marzia $u Directorate for Social Statistics and Welfare, Italian Statistical Institute (ISTAT), Rome, Italy
700    1_
$a Rodin, Urelija $u Croatian Institute of Public Health, School of Public Health 'Andrija Štampar', School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
700    1_
$a Szamotulska, Katarzyna $u Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, National Research Institute of Mother and Child, Warsaw, Poland
700    1_
$a Velebil, Petr $u Institute for the Care of Mother and Child, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Weber, Guy $u Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Directorate of Health, Luxembourg
700    1_
$a Zurriaga, Oscar $u Public Health General Directorate, Valencia Regional Public Health Authority, Spain $u Public Health and Preventive Medicine Department, University of Valencia, Spain $u Centre for Network Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
700    1_
$a Zeitlin, Jennifer $u Université de Paris, CRESS, Obstetrical Perinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Research Team (EPOPé), INSERM, INRA, Paris, F-75004, France $1 https://orcid.org/0000000295682969
710    2_
$a Euro-Peristat Research Network
773    0_
$w MED00012099 $t European journal of public health $x 1464-360X $g Roč. 32, č. 2 (2022), s. 200-206
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35157046 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220720 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220804135213 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1822515 $s 1170199
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 32 $c 2 $d 200-206 $e 20220401 $i 1464-360X $m European journal of public health $n Eur J Public Health $x MED00012099
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220720

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace