Cited by 22Maternal and Neonatal HealthcareStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyGestational Diabetes Research and Management

Maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes in the NICE birth cohort: an assessment of self-selection bias

Open access
Ögge, Linda Englund, Murray, Fiona, Modzelewska, Dominika, Lundqvist, Robert, Nilsson, Staffan, Carré, Helena, Kippler, Maria, Wold, Agnes E. +4 more·2022·The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prospective birth cohorts are essential for identifying associations between exposures and outcomes. However, voluntary participation introduces a potential bias due to self selection since the persons that chose to participate may differ in background characteristics and behaviors. OBJECTIVES: (NICE) birth cohort in northern Sweden. METHODS: = 4976) regarding maternal characteristics and lifestyle. Maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the groups and associations between exposures (smoking, folic acid, BMI, parity, education) and pregnancy outcomes (birth weight and gestational age) were analyzed by linear regression analyses, examining any interaction with the group. RESULTS: NICE participants were more highly educated, older and more likely to cohabit than the non-participants. They more often took folic acid and multivitamin supplements and less often smoked during early pregnancy. Pregnancy outcomes (mode of delivery, gestational age at delivery, birth weight and APGAR score) did, however, not differ significantly between participants and non-participants. Smoking, BMI, education and parity affected gestational age and birth weight, but the associations were of similar magnitude in participants and non-participants, with no significant effect on the group. CONCLUSION: Self-selection to the NICE study was evident in some factors related to lifestyle and socioeconomic characteristics but did not appear to skew pregnancy outcomes or alter well-known effects of certain lifestyle parameters on pregnancy outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14767058.2021.2011854

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • If an online health forum primarily attracts individuals with a particular condition who are actively seeking information and support, the data collected from that platform may not reflect the experiences and perspectives of individuals who do not actively engage in online discussions.

    “For example, if an online health forum primarily attracts individuals with a particular condition who are actively seeking information and support, the data collected from that platform may not reflect the experiences and perspectives of individuals who do not actively engage in online discussions [87].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ögge, L. E., Murray, F., Modzelewska, D., Lundqvist, R., Nilsson, S., Carré, H., Kippler, M., Wold, A. E., Sandberg, A.-S., Sandin, A., Jacobsson, B., & Barman, M.
Affiliations
  • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • Chalmers University of Technology (SE)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
Venue
The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine
Published
2022-01-03
Volume
35
Issue
25
Pages
9014-9022
ISSN
  • 1476-4954 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-7058
OpenAlex
W4205584489
Cited by
22
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
FWCI
5.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DiVA at Umeå University (Umeå University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Swedish Research Council Formas (2018-02275)
  • Swedish Research Council (521-2013-3154, 2019-01317)
  • Swedish Research Council for Health and Jane and Dan Olsson Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
Keywords
self-selection bias, maternal characteristics, pregnancy outcomes, birth weight, gestational age, maternal smoking, folic acid supplementation, maternal body mass index, parity, maternal education, socioeconomic status, mode of delivery, Apgar score
MeSH terms
Birth Weight, Female, Folic Acid, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Prospective Studies, Selection Bias

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review