Explore the vast range of titles available.

Immigrants have lower rates of low birth weight (LBW) and to some extent preterm birth (PTB), than their US-born counterparts. This pattern has been termed the ‘immigrant health paradox’. Social ties and support are one proposed explanation for this phenomenon. We examined the contribution of social ties and social support to LBW and PTB by race/ethnicity and nativity among women in New York City (NYC). The NYC Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey (2004–2007) data, linked with the selected items from birth certificates, were used to examine LBW and PTB by race/ethnicity and nativity status and the role of social ties and social support to adverse birth outcomes using bivariate and multivariable analyses. SUDAAN software was used to adjust for complex survey design and sampling weights. US- and foreign-born Blacks had significantly increased odds of PTB [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.43, 95 % CI 1.56, 3.77 and AOR = 2.6, 95 % CI 1.66, 4.24, respectively] compared to US-born Whites. Odds of PTB among foreign-born Other Latinas, Island-born Puerto Ricans’ and foreign-born Asians’ were not significantly different from US-born Whites, while odds of PTB for foreign-born Whites were significantly lower (AOR = 0.47, 95 % CI 0.26, 0.84). US and foreign-born Blacks’ odds of LBW were 2.5 fold that of US-born Whites. Fewer social ties were associated with 32–39 % lower odds of PTB. Lower social support was associated with decreased odds of LBW (AOR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.50, 0.96). We found stronger evidence of the immigrant health paradox across racial/ethnic groups for PTB than for LBW. Results also point to the importance of accurately assessing social ties and social support during pregnancy and to considering the potential downside of social ties.

To examine breastfeeding outcomes and factors associated with breastfeeding <8 weeks among preterm infants. Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) data for seven sites from 2004 to 2007 were used. Logistic regression was used to identify correlates of short breastfeeding duration among preterm infants. Among preterm infants, short breastfeeding duration (<8 weeks) was associated with maternal age ≤19 years (OR 1.75; 95 % CI: 1.22, 2.50), infant birth weight between 1,500 and 2,499 g (OR 1.29; 95 % CI: 1.01, 1.65), maternal obesity (OR 1.52; 95 % CI: 1.17, 1.98), smoking (OR 2.61; 95 % CI: 1.87, 3.63), and hypertension (OR 1.34; 95 % CI: 1.06, 1.69). Receiving a phone number for breastfeeding help (OR 0.59; 95 % CI: 0.44, 0.78) and not receiving a gift pack with formula (OR 0.64; 95 % CI: 0.47, 0.87) were associated with decreased odds of short duration. Speaking with a provider about breastfeeding prenatally was associated with increased odds of short duration (OR 1.75; 95 % CI: 1.33, 2.30). These findings strengthen the hypothesis that infant and maternal health are determinants of breastfeeding preterm infants and suggest a need to provide additional support to smokers, obese and hypertensive women, and mothers of infants with birth weights between 1,500 and 2,499 g, to help them sustain breastfeeding. Support from hospitals, such as providing a telephone number for breastfeeding help, and not providing a gift pack with formula, can also make a difference. These practices should be adopted by hospitals.

Objective. We assessed the validity of selected items on the 2003 revised U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth to understand the accuracy of new and existing items. Methods. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of select variables reported on the birth certificate using the medical record as the gold standard for a representative sample of live births in New York City (n=603) and Vermont (n=664) in 2009. Results. In both sites, sensitivity was excellent (>90%) for Medicaid coverage at delivery, any previous live births, and current method of delivery; sensitivity was moderate (70%-90%) for gestational diabetes; and sensitivity was poor (<70%) for premature rupture of the membranes and gestational hypertension. In both sites, PPV was excellent for Medicaid coverage, any previous live births, previous cesarean delivery, and current method of delivery, and poor for premature rupture of membranes. In both sites, almost all items had excellent (>90%) specificity and NPV. Conclusion. Further research is needed to determine how best to improve the quality of data on the birth certificate. Future revisions of the birth certificate may consider removing those items that have consistently proven difficult to report accurately.

To assess the validity of self-reported maternal and infant health indicators reported by mothers an average of 4 months after delivery. Three validity measures—sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV)—were calculated for pregnancy history, pregnancy complications, health care utilization, and infant health indicators self-reported on the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) questionnaire by a representative sample of mothers delivering live births in New York City (NYC) (n = 603) and Vermont (n = 664) in 2009. Data abstracted from hospital records served as gold standards. All data were weighted to be representative of women delivering live births in NYC or Vermont during the study period. Most PRAMS indicators had >90 % specificity. Indicators with >90 % sensitivity and PPV for both sites included prior live birth, any diabetes, and Medicaid insurance at delivery, and for Vermont only, infant admission to the NICU and breastfeeding in the hospital. Indicators with poor sensitivity and PPV (<70 %) for both sites (i.e., NYC and Vermont) included placenta previa and/or placental abruption, urinary tract infection or kidney infection, and for NYC only, preterm labor, prior low-birth-weight birth, and prior preterm birth. For Vermont only, receipt of an HIV test during pregnancy had poor sensitivity and PPV. Mothers accurately reported information on prior live births and Medicaid insurance at delivery; however, mothers’ recall of certain pregnancy complications and pregnancy history was poor. These findings could be used to prioritize data collection of indicators with high validity.

Maternal smoking is captured on the 2003 US Standard Birth Certificate based on self-reported tobacco use before and during pregnancy collected on post-delivery maternal worksheets. Study objectives were to compare smoking reported on the birth certificate to maternal worksheets and prenatal and hospital medical records. The authors analyzed a sample of New York City (NYC) and Vermont women (n = 1,037) with a live birth from January to August 2009 whose responses to the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey were linked with birth certificates and abstracted medical records and maternal worksheets. We calculated smoking prevalence and agreement (kappa) between sources overall and by maternal and hospital characteristics. Smoking before and during pregnancy was 13.7 and 10.4 % using birth certificates, 15.2 and 10.7 % using maternal worksheets, 18.1 and 14.1 % using medical records, and 20.5 and 15.0 % using either maternal worksheets or medical records. Birth certificates had “almost perfect” agreement with maternal worksheets for smoking before and during pregnancy (κ = 0.92 and 0.89) and “substantial” agreement with medical records (κ = 0.70 and 0.74), with variation by education, insurance, and parity. Smoking information on NYC and Vermont birth certificates closely agreed with maternal worksheets but was underestimated compared with medical records, with variation by select maternal characteristics. Opportunities exist to improve birth certificate smoking data, such as reducing the stigma of smoking, and improving the collection, transcription, and source of information.

National birth registration guidelines were revised in 2003 to improve data quality; however, few studies have evaluated the impact on local jurisdictions and their data users. In New York City (NYC), approximately 125,000 births are registered annually with the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and data are used routinely by the department’s maternal and child health (MCH) programs. In order to better meet MCH program needs, we used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines to assess birth data usefulness, simplicity, data quality, timeliness and representativeness. We interviewed birth registration and MCH program staff, reviewed a 2009 survey of birth registrars (n = 39), and analyzed 2008–2011 birth records for timeliness and completeness (n = 502,274). Thirteen MCH programs use birth registration data for eligibility determination, needs assessment, program evaluation, and surveillance. Demographic variables are used frequently, nearly 100 % complete, and considered the gold standard by programs; in contrast, medical variables’ use and validity varies widely. Seventy-seven percent of surveyed birth registrars reported ≥1 problematic items in the system; 64.1 % requested further training. During 2008–2011, the median interval between birth and registration was 5 days (range 0–260 days); 11/13 programs were satisfied with timeliness. The NYC birth registration system provides local MCH programs useful, timely, and representative data. However, some medical items are difficult to collect, of low quality, and rarely used. We recommend enhancing training for birth registrars, continuing quality improvement efforts, increasing collaboration with program users, and removing consistently low-quality and low-use variables.