4.7 Article

Detecting geographical clusters of low birth weight and/or preterm birth in Japan

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-28642-9

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The average birth weight in Japan has decreased significantly over the past thirty years, while the prevalence of preterm birth has increased. However, the geographic differences in low birthweight and/or preterm birth in Japan are not well understood. This study used spatial analysis to identify clusters and hot spots of low birthweight and/or preterm birth, and found that the most likely hot spot areas were located in the small islands in southwest Japan and the cities nearby Mt. Fuji.
In Japan, mean birth weight has significantly decreased from 3152 g in 1979 to 3018 g in 2010 and the prevalence of preterm birth (PTB) has risen to 5.7% in the last thirty years. However, the presence and magnitude of geographical differences in low birthweight (LBW) and/or PTB in Japan is not well understood. We implemented spatial analysis to identify localized clusters and hot spots of LBW and/or PTB during 2012-2016. The Japan national birth database was used in this study. A total of 5,041,685 (male: 2,587,415, female: 2,454,270) births were used for spatial analysis using empirical Bayes estimates of the incidence rate of LBW and/or PTB and spatial scan tests to detect hot-spot areas with p values calculated from Monte Carlo iterations. The most and second likely clusters were located in two areas: (1) the small islands in south-west Japan (Amami and Okinawa, Relative risk = 1.09-1.67 with p < 0.001) and (2) the cities on the base of Mt. Fuji, stretching over three neighboring prefectures of Yamanashi, Shizuoka and Kanagawa (Relative risk = 1.10-1.55 with p < 0.001), respectively. We need to optimize the medical resource allocations based on the evidence in geographical clustering of LBW and/or PTB at specific locations in Japan.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available