4.6 Article

Validation of maternal reported pregnancy and birth characteristics against the Medical Birth Registry of Norway

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181794

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway [214123, 230827, 228174]
  2. Bergen Medical Research Foundation
  3. Western Norway Regional Health Authority
  4. Norwegian Labour Inspection
  5. Norwegian Asthma and Allergy Association
  6. European Union [633212]
  7. [912011]
  8. [911892]
  9. [911631]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies using mothers' self-reported information on birth and pregnancy characteristics are common, but the validity of such data is uncertain. We evaluated questionnaire data from the RHINE III study on reproductive health provided by 715 mothers from Bergen, Norway, about their 1629 births between 1967 and 2010, using the Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN) as gold standard. Validity of dichotomous variables (gender, preterm birth [<37 weeks' gestation], postterm birth [>42 weeks' gestation], induction of labour, forceps delivery, vacuum delivery, caesarean section, were assessed by sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) and Cohen's kappa. Paired t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots were used to validate birthweight, stratified by mother's level of education, parity, birth year and child's asthma status. Child's gender and caesarean section showed high degree of validity (kappa = 0.99, sensitivity and specificity 100%). Instrumental delivery and extremely preterm birth showed good agreement with sensitivity 75-92%. Preterm birth and induction of labour showed moderate agreement. Post term delivery was poorly reported. The validity appeared to be independent of recall time over 45 years, and of the child's asthma status. Maternally reported birth and pregnancy information is feasible and cheap, showed high validity for important birth and pregnancy parameters, and showed similar risk-associations compared to registry data.

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