Cited by 521Maternal and Neonatal HealthcareHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesBirth, Development, and Health

Cohort Profile: The 1946 National Birth Cohort (MRC National Survey of Health and Development)

Wadsworth, Michael, Kuh, Diana, Richards, Marcus, Hardy, Rebecca·2006·International Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

The first of the British National Birth Cohort studies aimed to address two health and social policy questions of importance in the years before the establishment of the National Health Service (NHS) in 1948. The first question, identified by the Royal Commission on Population, asked why the national fertility rate had been falling consistently since the middle of the 19th century. A proposed explanation was that the ‘medical and other costs associated with the birth of a baby may today be a serious deterrent to parenthood.’1 The second question asked ‘what was the national distribution and use of obstetric medical and midwifery services, and how far do they prevent premature and infant death, and promote the health of mothers and infants?’1 The study set up to address these questions was promoted by the Royal College of Obstetricians and the Population Investigation Committee, and funded by the Nuffield Foundation and the National Birthday Trust Fund for a data collection from all who delivered births that took place during March 3–9, 1946 throughout England, Wales, and Scotland.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ije/dyi201

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wadsworth, M., Kuh, D., Richards, M., & Hardy, R.
Affiliations
The Royal Free Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Wadsworth, Michael
Venue
International Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2005-10-04
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
49-54
ISSN
  • 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3685
OpenAlex
W2100152214
Cited by
515
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 26
FWCI
21.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Historical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Birth, Development, and Health
Keywords
MRC National Survey of Health and Development, birth cohort, fertility decline, obstetric care, midwifery services, maternal and newborn health, preterm birth, infant mortality, National Health Service, health policy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child Development, Child Welfare, Child, Preschool, Data Collection, Female, United Kingdom, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Cohort Studies, Sample Size

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