Clarity and consistency in stillbirth reporting in Europe: why is it so hard to get this right?

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00023698%3A_____%2F22%3AN0000009" target="_blank" >RIV/00023698:_____/22:N0000009 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8975542/" target="_blank" >https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8975542/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac001" target="_blank" >10.1093/eurpub/ckac001</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Clarity and consistency in stillbirth reporting in Europe: why is it so hard to get this right?

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Background Stillbirth is a major public health problem, but measurement remains a challenge even in high-income countries. We compared routine stillbirth statistics in Europe reported by Eurostat with data from the Euro-Peristat research network. Methods We used data on stillbirths in 2015 from both sources for 31 European countries. Stillbirth rates per 1000 total births were analyzed by gestational age (GA) and birthweight groups. Information on termination of pregnancy at >= 22 weeks' GA was analyzed separately. Results Routinely collected stillbirth rates were higher than those reported by the research network. For stillbirths with a birthweight >= 500 g, the difference between the mean rates of the countries for Eurostat and Euro-Peristat data was 22% [4.4/1000, versus 3.5/1000, mean difference 0.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-1.0]. When using a birthweight threshold of 1000 g, this difference was smaller, 12% (2.9/1000, versus 2.5/1000, mean difference 0.4 with 95% CI 0.3-0.5), but substantial differences remained for individual countries. In Euro-Peristat, missing data on birthweight ranged from 0% to 29% (average 5.0%) and were higher than missing data for GA (0-23%, average 1.8%). Conclusions Routine stillbirth data for European countries in international databases are not comparable and should not be used for benchmarking or surveillance without careful verification with other sources. Recommendations for improvement include using a cut-off based on GA, excluding late terminations of pregnancy and linking multiple sources to improve the quality of national databases.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Clarity and consistency in stillbirth reporting in Europe: why is it so hard to get this right?

Popis výsledku anglicky

Background Stillbirth is a major public health problem, but measurement remains a challenge even in high-income countries. We compared routine stillbirth statistics in Europe reported by Eurostat with data from the Euro-Peristat research network. Methods We used data on stillbirths in 2015 from both sources for 31 European countries. Stillbirth rates per 1000 total births were analyzed by gestational age (GA) and birthweight groups. Information on termination of pregnancy at >= 22 weeks' GA was analyzed separately. Results Routinely collected stillbirth rates were higher than those reported by the research network. For stillbirths with a birthweight >= 500 g, the difference between the mean rates of the countries for Eurostat and Euro-Peristat data was 22% [4.4/1000, versus 3.5/1000, mean difference 0.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-1.0]. When using a birthweight threshold of 1000 g, this difference was smaller, 12% (2.9/1000, versus 2.5/1000, mean difference 0.4 with 95% CI 0.3-0.5), but substantial differences remained for individual countries. In Euro-Peristat, missing data on birthweight ranged from 0% to 29% (average 5.0%) and were higher than missing data for GA (0-23%, average 1.8%). Conclusions Routine stillbirth data for European countries in international databases are not comparable and should not be used for benchmarking or surveillance without careful verification with other sources. Recommendations for improvement include using a cut-off based on GA, excluding late terminations of pregnancy and linking multiple sources to improve the quality of national databases.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30214 - Obstetrics and gynaecology

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

ISSN

1101-1262

e-ISSN

1464-360X

Svazek periodika

32

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

7

Strana od-do

200-206

Kód UT WoS článku

000764175100001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85128161136