2015
DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12254
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Implications of Using a Fetuses‐at‐Risk Approach When Fetuses Are Not at Risk

Abstract: Gestational-age-specific FAR rates of postnatal outcomes strongly depend on the probability of live birth. Thus, they reflect neither the causal effect of gestational length, nor that of a given exposure. Indeed, if an exposure shortens gestation, FAR rates will be higher in exposed infants even when the exposure has no impact on the outcome under study. These intrinsic limitations should be taken into account when applying FAR analyses to postnatal endpoints.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
66
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
66
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study was also conditioned on having a live-birth and potentially prone to competing-risks bias, although this would likely result in the exposure appearing protective given the association of phthalates with reduced fecundability and pregnancy loss (Braun et al 2017; Messerlian et al 2016). However, consideration of including at-risk fetuses remains controversial (Basso 2016) and further empirical testing of potential biases may be warranted (Schisterman and Sjaarda 2016). Also, co-exposure to other chemicals of concern was not accounted for and exposure to phthalates may be reflective of other unknown lifestyle or fertility factors that might be associated with birth weight.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our study was also conditioned on having a live-birth and potentially prone to competing-risks bias, although this would likely result in the exposure appearing protective given the association of phthalates with reduced fecundability and pregnancy loss (Braun et al 2017; Messerlian et al 2016). However, consideration of including at-risk fetuses remains controversial (Basso 2016) and further empirical testing of potential biases may be warranted (Schisterman and Sjaarda 2016). Also, co-exposure to other chemicals of concern was not accounted for and exposure to phthalates may be reflective of other unknown lifestyle or fertility factors that might be associated with birth weight.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rates calculated under the fetuses‐at‐risk model were incidence density rates expressed per 1000 fetus‐weeks . Although the analyses presented focus on perinatal death rates, rates were also estimated for stillbirths and neonatal deaths separately …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…72 However, the relevance of such considerations is questionable since the population at risk is live-born children and the fetuses-at-risk approach can produce biased estimates for postnatal outcomes. 73,74 …”
Section: Epidemiological Studies Of Paternal Preconception Exposuresmentioning
confidence: 99%