4.6 Article

Long-Term Survival of Individuals Born Small and Large for Gestational Age

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 10, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138594

关键词

-

资金

  1. Oak Foundation Fellowship [OCAY-12-319]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Little is known on long-term survival and causes of death among individuals born small or large for gestational age. This study investigates birth weight in relation to survival and causes of death over time. Methods A national cohort of 1.7 million live-born singletons in Denmark was followed during 19792011, using the Danish Civil Registration System, the Medical Birth Registry and the Cause of Death Registry. Cox proportional hazards were estimated for the impact of small (SGA) and large (LGA) gestation weight and mortality overall, by age group and birth cohort. Results Compared to normal weight children, SGA children were associated with increased risk of dying over time. Though most of the deaths occurred during the first year of life, the cumulative mortality risk was increased until 30 years of age. The hazard ratios [HR] for dying among SGA children ages < 2 years were: 3.47 (95% CI, 3.30-3.64) and 1.06 (95% CI, 0.60-1.87) in 30 years and older. HR for dying among SGA adults (20-29 years) were: 1.20 (95% CI, 0.99-1.46) in years 1979-1982 and 1.61 (95% CI, 1.04-2.51) in years 19891994. The SGA born had increased risk of dying from infection, heart disease, respiratory disease, digestive disease, congenital malformation, perinatal conditions, and accidents, suicide, and homicide. Individuals born LGA were associated with decreased mortality risk, but with increased risk of dying from malignant neoplasm. Conclusions Survival has improved independently of birth weight the past 30 years. However, children born SGA remain at significantly increased risk of dying up till they turn 30 years of age. Individuals born LGA have lower mortality risk but only in the first two years of life.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据