Short interpregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes: How important is the timing of confounding variable ascertainment?

被引:8
|
作者
Schummers, Laura [1 ]
Hutcheon, Jennifer A. [2 ]
Norman, Wendy, V [1 ,3 ]
Liauw, Jessica [2 ]
Bolatova, Talshyn [1 ]
Ahrens, Katherine A. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, Dept Family Practice, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[2] Univ British Columbia, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[3] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Fac Publ Hlth & Policy, London, England
[4] Univ Southern Maine, Muskie Sch Publ Policy, Portland, ME USA
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
causal inference; confounding adjustment; interpregnancy interval; pregnancy spacing; time‐ varying confounding; vital statistics; PERINATAL OUTCOMES; WEIGHT-LOSS; SMOKING; RISK; WOMEN; DISPARITIES; OBESITY; IMPACT; BIAS;
D O I
10.1111/ppe.12716
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background Estimation of causal effects of short interpregnancy interval on pregnancy outcomes may be confounded by time-varying factors. These confounders should be ascertained at or before delivery of the first ("index") pregnancy, but are often only measured at the subsequent pregnancy. Objectives To quantify bias induced by adjusting for time-varying confounders ascertained at the subsequent (rather than the index) pregnancy in estimated effects of short interpregnancy interval on pregnancy outcomes. Methods We analysed linked records for births in British Columbia, Canada, 2004-2014, to women with >= 2 singleton pregnancies (n = 121 151). We used log binomial regression to compare short (<6, 6-11, 12-17 months) to 18-23-month reference intervals for 5 outcomes: perinatal mortality (stillbirth and neonatal death); small for gestational age (SGA) birth and preterm delivery (all, early, spontaneous). We calculated per cent differences between adjusted risk ratios (aRR) from two models with maternal age, low socio-economic status, body mass index, and smoking ascertained in the index pregnancy and the subsequent pregnancy. We considered relative per cent differences <5% minimal, 5%-9% modest, and >= 10% substantial. Results Adjustment for confounders measured at the subsequent pregnancy introduced modest bias towards the null for perinatal mortality aRRs for <6-month interpregnancy intervals [-9.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -15.3, -6.2). SGA aRRs were minimally biased towards the null (-1.1%, 95% CI -2.6, 0.8) for <6-month intervals. While early preterm delivery aRRs were substantially biased towards the null (-10.4%, 95% CI -14.0, -6.6) for <6-month interpregnancy intervals, bias was minimal for <6-month intervals for all preterm deliveries (-0.6%, 95% CI -2.0, 0.8) and spontaneous preterm deliveries (-1.3%, 95% CI -3.1, 0.1). For all outcomes, bias was attenuated and minimal for 6-11-month and 12-17-month interpregnancy intervals. Conclusion These findings suggest that maternally linked pregnancy data may not be needed for appropriate confounder adjustment when studying the effects of short interpregnancy interval on pregnancy outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:428 / 437
页数:10
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] The effect of a very short interpregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes following a previous pregnancy loss
    Wong, Luchin F.
    Schliep, Karen C.
    Silver, Robert M.
    Mumford, Sunni L.
    Perkins, Neil J.
    Ye, Aijun
    Galai, Noya
    Wactawski-Wende, Jean
    Lynch, Anne M.
    Townsend, Janet M.
    Faraggi, David
    Schisterman, Enrique F.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 212 (03) : 375.e1 - 375.e11
  • [2] Short Interpregnancy Interval Following a Multifetal Pregnancy: Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes
    Weiss, Ari
    Sela, Hen Y.
    Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
    Rottenstreich, Misgav
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (07)
  • [3] Short interpregnancy interval can lead to adverse pregnancy outcomes: A meta-analysis
    Wang, Yumei
    Zeng, Can
    Chen, Yuhong
    Yang, Liu
    Tian, Di
    Liu, Xinghui
    Lin, Yonghong
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2022, 9
  • [4] Twin pregnancy following a short interpregnancy interval: Maternal and neonatal outcomes
    Weiss, Ari
    Ben Nun, Eyal Lang
    Sela, Hen Y.
    Rotem, Reut
    Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
    Rottenstreich, Misgav
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2022, 276 : 185 - 190
  • [5] Interpregnancy Interval and Pregnancy Outcomes Causal or Not?
    Klebanoff, Mark A.
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2017, 129 (03) : 405 - 407
  • [6] Association of Short Interpregnancy Interval With Pregnancy Outcomes According to Maternal Age
    Schummers, Laura
    Hutcheon, Jennifer A.
    Hernandez-Diaz, Sonia
    Williams, Paige L.
    Hacker, Michele R.
    VanderWeele, J.
    Norman, Wendy, V
    JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2018, 178 (12) : 1661 - 1670
  • [7] Interpregnancy interval and singleton pregnancy outcomes after frozen embryo transfer
    Quinn, Molly M.
    Rosen, Mitchell P.
    Allen, Isabel Elaine
    Huddleston, Heather G.
    Cedars, Marcelle I.
    Fujimoto, Victor Y.
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2019, 111 (06) : 1145 - 1150
  • [8] The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes
    Tessema, Gizachew A.
    Haberg, Siri E.
    Pereira, Gavin
    Magnus, Maria C.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2022, 129 (11) : 1853 - 1861
  • [9] Recurrent short interpregnancy interval: Maternal and neonatal outcomes
    Weiss, Ari
    Sela, Hen Y.
    Rotem, Reut
    Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
    Rottenstreich, Misgav
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2021, 264 : 299 - 305
  • [10] Interpregnancy interval following miscarriage and adverse pregnancy outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kangatharan, Chrishny
    Labram, Saffi
    Bhattacharya, Sohinee
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2017, 23 (02) : 221 - 231