The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Sex differences in outcomes of very low birthweight infants: the newborn male disadvantage
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the differences in short term outcome of very low birthweight infants attributable to sex. METHODS: Boys and girls weighing 501–1500 g admitted to the 12 centres of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network were compared. Maternal information and perinatal data were collected from hospital records. Infant outcome was recorded at discharge, at 120 days of age if the infant was still in hospital, or at death. Best obstetric estimate based on the last menstrual period, standard obstetric factors, and ultrasound were used to assign gestational age in completed weeks. Data were collected on a cohort that included 3356 boys and 3382 girls, representing all inborn births from 1 May 1991 to 31 December 1993. RESULTS: Mortality for boys was 22% and that for girls 15%. The prenatal and perinatal data indicate few differences between the sex groups, except that boys were less likely to have been exposed to antenatal steroids (odds ratio (OR) = 0.80) and were less stable after birth, as reflected in a higher percentage with lower Apgar scores at one and five minutes and the need for physical and pharmacological assistance. In particular, boys were more likely to have been intubated (OR = 1.16) and to have received resuscitation medication (OR = 1.40). Boys had a higher risk (OR > 1.00) for most adverse neonatal outcomes. Although pulmonary morbidity predominated, intracranial haemorrhage and urinary tract infection were also more common. CONCLUSIONS: Relative differences in short term morbidity and mortality persist between the sexes.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Blencowe, H., Cousens, S., Oestergaard, M. Z., Chou, D., Moller, A.-B., Narwal, R., Adler, A., Vera Garcia, C., Rohde, S., Say, L., et al. (2012) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60820-4 · Cited by 4,568
Review: Sex and the human placenta: Mediating differential strategies of fetal growth and survival
Clifton, V. L. (2010) · Placenta · doi:10.1016/j.placenta.2009.11.010 · Cited by 868
Rutter, M., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. E. (2003) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00194 · Cited by 672
The gestational foundation of sex differences in development and vulnerability
DiPietro, J. A., & Voegtline, K. M. (2017) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.07.068 · Cited by 316
Fetal sex and preterm birth: are males at greater risk?
Zeitlin, J. (2002) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/17.10.2762 · Cited by 235
Metadata
- Authors
- Stevenson, D. K., Verter, J., Fanaroff, A. A., Oh, W., Ehrenkranz, R. A., Shankaran, S., Donovan, E. F., Wright, L. L., Lemons, J. A., Tyson, J. E., Korones, S. B., Bauer, C. R., Stoll, B. J., & Papile, L.-A.
- Venue
- Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2000-11-01
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- F182-F185
- ISSN
- 1359-2998 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2052
- OpenAlex
- W2169296425
- Cited by
- 474
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sex differences in outcomes of very low birthweight infants: the newborn male disadvantage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/fn.83.3.f182
- The paper
- Stevenson, D. K., Verter, J., Fanaroff, A. A., Oh, W., Ehrenkranz, R. A., Shankaran, S., Donovan, E. F., Wright, L. L., Lemons, J. A., Tyson, J. E., Korones, S. B., Bauer, C. R., Stoll, B. J., & Papile, L.-A. (2000). Sex differences in outcomes of very low birthweight infants: the newborn male disadvantage. Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition. https://doi.org/10.1136/fn.83.3.f182
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.