Cited by 10

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Maternal snuff use and cotinine in late pregnancy—A validation study

Gunnerbeck, Anna, Raaschou, Pauline, Cnattingius, Sven, Edstedt Bonamy, Anna‐Karin, Wickström, Ronny·2018·Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Abstract

Introduction: Oral moist snuff is widely used in Sweden including during pregnancy. Maternal snuff use has been associated with increased risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes in epidemiological studies. Self‐reported maternal snuff use has not been validated previously. The main objective of this study was to validate self‐reported snuff use in pregnancy in a prospective cohort study and in the Medical Birth Register. Material and methods: A prospective Swedish cohort study, 2005‐2011, in which 572 women were asked to participate. Of 474 recruited women, 381 non‐smokers (263 snuff users and 118 non‐tobacco users) were included in the main analyses. Participants prospectively reported snuff use through questionnaires. Medical Birth Register data on the participants was obtained. Maternal urine cotinine was collected in late pregnancy and was used as a biomarker. Results: Cotinine levels in maternal urine confirmed a high validity of self‐reported snuff use through questionnaires in late pregnancy; sensitivity and specificity values were 98% and 96%, respectively. In the Medical Birth Register, 45% of the snuff users were misclassified as nonusers in late pregnancy. There were significant differences in median cotinine levels between users of mini pouches and users of standard pouches, but there was a great difference of cotinine levels among users with similar number of pouches used daily. Conclusions: Self‐reported snuff use through questionnaires has high validity. In the Medical Birth Register, in late pregnancy, many snuff users were misclassified as nonusers. As a consequence, there is a risk of underestimating the harmful effects of snuff use when using late pregnancy Medical Birth Register data.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/aogs.13410

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. 10.1111/1471-0528.14213 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1542/peds.2010-3811 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1093/ntr/ntt117 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1093/ntr/ntn010 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1080/14622200701491255 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/14622200210123581 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a017925 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.jchromb.2010.12.012 · DOI
  9. 10.2105/AJPH.2008.144485 · DOI
  10. Tong VT, 2013, Trends in smoking before, during, and after pregnancy—Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, United States, 40 sites, 2000‐2010, MMWR Surveill Summ, 62, 1
  11. 10.1177/08959374970110030501 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1093/aje/153.10.954 · DOI
  13. 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2005.00660.x · DOI
  14. 10.1124/jpet.301.2.594 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1056/NEJM198811173192005 · DOI
  16. 10.1093/aje/kwu182 · DOI
  17. 10.1136/tc.2004.008789 · DOI
  18. 10.1038/pr.2012.36 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1046/j.1365-3016.2001.00321.x · DOI
  20. 10.1097/00124784-200307000-00011 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/s10995-005-0022-6 · DOI
  22. Mattsson K, 2016, Cotinine validation of self‐reported smoking during pregnancy in the Swedish Medical Birth Register, Nicotine Tob Res, 18, 79
  23. 10.1016/j.wombi.2009.05.002 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 10

Metadata

Authors
Gunnerbeck, A., Raaschou, P., Cnattingius, S., Edstedt Bonamy, A., & Wickström, R.
Venue
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-07-20
Volume
97
Issue
11
Pages
1373-1380
ISSN
  • 0001-6349
  • 1600-0412
Cited by
10
References
4
Language
en
Funders
  • Stockholms Läns Landsting (20150658, 20110119, 20110741)
  • Medicinska Forskningsrådet (521‐2009‐4884)
  • Stiftelsen Samariten

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