Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Should spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births be separated for studying aetiology?

Publication ,  Journal Article
Savitz, DA; Dole, N; Herring, AH; Kaczor, D; Murphy, J; Siega-Riz, AM; Thorp, JM; MacDonald, TL
Published in: Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology
March 2005

An increasing proportion of preterm births result from medical interventions, and the practice of aggregating all preterm births vs. splitting into spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births is inconsistent. While mechanistic and clinical arguments can be offered for either approach, we empirically evaluated the predictiveness of a range of risk factors for preterm birth in the Pregnancy, Infection, and Nutrition Study. Most influences were shared across the two subsets - African-American ethnicity, advancing age, delivery at a university medical centre, prior preterm birth and smoking. Medically indicated preterm births appeared to be associated with intensity of medical care, higher in the university medical centre and lower for the poorest women. Body mass index was positively associated with medically indicated preterm birth and inversely with spontaneous preterm birth. Given the complexity of the aetiological pathways, both aggregation and disaggregation are well justified and should be included in studies of the causes of preterm birth.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology

DOI

EISSN

1365-3016

ISSN

0269-5022

Publication Date

March 2005

Volume

19

Issue

2

Start / End Page

97 / 105

Related Subject Headings

  • Vaginosis, Bacterial
  • Socioeconomic Factors
  • Smoking
  • Risk Factors
  • Prospective Studies
  • Premature Birth
  • Pregnancy Complications, Infectious
  • Pregnancy
  • Odds Ratio
  • Infant, Newborn
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Savitz, D. A., Dole, N., Herring, A. H., Kaczor, D., Murphy, J., Siega-Riz, A. M., … MacDonald, T. L. (2005). Should spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births be separated for studying aetiology? Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 19(2), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2005.00637.x
Savitz, David A., Nancy Dole, Amy H. Herring, Diane Kaczor, June Murphy, Anna Maria Siega-Riz, John M. Thorp, and Thaddeus L. MacDonald. “Should spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births be separated for studying aetiology?Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 19, no. 2 (March 2005): 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2005.00637.x.
Savitz DA, Dole N, Herring AH, Kaczor D, Murphy J, Siega-Riz AM, et al. Should spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births be separated for studying aetiology? Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology. 2005 Mar;19(2):97–105.
Savitz, David A., et al. “Should spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births be separated for studying aetiology?Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, vol. 19, no. 2, Mar. 2005, pp. 97–105. Epmc, doi:10.1111/j.1365-3016.2005.00637.x.
Savitz DA, Dole N, Herring AH, Kaczor D, Murphy J, Siega-Riz AM, Thorp JM, MacDonald TL. Should spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births be separated for studying aetiology? Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology. 2005 Mar;19(2):97–105.
Journal cover image

Published In

Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology

DOI

EISSN

1365-3016

ISSN

0269-5022

Publication Date

March 2005

Volume

19

Issue

2

Start / End Page

97 / 105

Related Subject Headings

  • Vaginosis, Bacterial
  • Socioeconomic Factors
  • Smoking
  • Risk Factors
  • Prospective Studies
  • Premature Birth
  • Pregnancy Complications, Infectious
  • Pregnancy
  • Odds Ratio
  • Infant, Newborn