Re-evaluation of link between interpregnancy interval and adverse birth outcomes: retrospective cohort study matching two intervals per mother
MetadataShow full item record
This open access article is distributed under the Creative Commons license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Objective - To re-evaluate the causal effect of interpregnancy interval on adverse birth outcomes, on the basis that previous studies relying on between mother comparisons may have inadequately adjusted for confounding by maternal risk factors. Design - Retrospective cohort study using conditional logistic regression (matching two intervals per mother so each mother acts as her own control) to model the incidence of adverse birth outcomes as a function of interpregnancy interval; additional unconditional logistic regression with adjustment for confounders enabled comparison with the unmatched design of previous studies. Setting - Perth, Western Australia, 1980-2010. Participants - 40 441 mothers who each delivered three liveborn singleton neonates. Main outcome measures - Preterm birth (<37 weeks), small for gestational age birth (<10th centile of birth weight by sex and gestational age), and low birth weight (<2500 g). Results - Within mother analysis of interpregnancy intervals indicated a much weaker effect of short intervals on the odds of preterm birth and low birth weight compared with estimates generated using a traditional between mother analysis. The traditional unmatched design estimated an adjusted odds ratio for an interpregnancy interval of 0-5 months (relative to the reference category of 18-23 months) of 1.41 (95% confidence interval 1.31 to 1.51) for preterm birth, 1.26 (1.15 to 1.37) for low birth weight, and 0.98 (0.92 to 1.06) for small for gestational age birth. In comparison, the matched design showed a much weaker effect of short interpregnancy interval on preterm birth (odds ratio 1.07, 0.86 to 1.34) and low birth weight (1.03, 0.79 to 1.34), and the effect for small for gestational age birth remained small (1.08, 0.87 to 1.34). Both the unmatched and matched models estimated a high odds of small for gestational age birth and low birth weight for long interpregnancy intervals (longer than 59 months), but the estimated effect of long interpregnancy intervals on the odds of preterm birth was much weaker in the matched model than in the unmatched model. Conclusion - This study questions the causal effect of short interpregnancy intervals on adverse birth outcomes and points to the possibility of unmeasured or inadequately specified maternal factors in previous studies.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
A population-based matched sibling analysis estimating the association between first interpregnancy interval and birth outcomesRegan, A.; Pereira, Gavin (2018)The association between a single interpregnancy interval (IPI) and birth outcomes has not yet been explored using matched methods. We modeled the odds of preterm birth, being small for gestational age, and having low birth ...
Gebremedhin, Amanuel Tesfay ; Regan, Annette ; Ball, Stephen ; Betrán, A.P.; Foo, D.; Gissler, M.; Håberg, S.E.; Malacova, Eva ; Marinovich, M. Luke; Pereira, Gavin (2019)© 2019 The Authors Purpose: To examine the association between interpregnancy interval (IPI) and gestational diabetes using both within-mother and between-mother comparisons. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 103,909 ...
Developing evidence-based recommendations for optimal interpregnancy intervals in high-income countries: Protocol for an international cohort studyMarinovich, M.; Regan, Annette; Gissler, M.; Magnus, M.; Håberg, S.; Padula, A.; Mayo, J.; Shaw, G.; Ball, Stephen; Malacova, Eva; Gebremedhin, Amanuel Tesfay; Nassar, N.; Marston, C.; De Klerk, N.; Betran, A.; Pereira, Gavin (2019)Introduction Short interpregnancy interval (IPI) has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes. WHO recommends waiting at least 2 years after a live birth and 6 months after miscarriage or induced termination before ...