2015
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2015-309155
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Where do the differences in childhood mortality rates between England and Wales and Sweden originate?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We restricted our cohort to infants who were alive at postnatal discharge, to avoid bias due to differences in obstetric and neonatal care quality between countries (eg delivery and treatment for infants with congenital anomalies or severe birth defects). Due to expected differences in definitions for viability between countries, we excluded infants born <24 weeks of completed gestation 11 . We excluded infants with incomplete data on maternal age, gestational age at birth, or socio‐economic status (Table a,b).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…We restricted our cohort to infants who were alive at postnatal discharge, to avoid bias due to differences in obstetric and neonatal care quality between countries (eg delivery and treatment for infants with congenital anomalies or severe birth defects). Due to expected differences in definitions for viability between countries, we excluded infants born <24 weeks of completed gestation 11 . We excluded infants with incomplete data on maternal age, gestational age at birth, or socio‐economic status (Table a,b).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to expected differences in definitions for viability between countries, we excluded infants born <24 weeks of completed gestation. 11 We excluded infants with incomplete data on maternal age, gestational age at birth, or socio‐economic status (Table S3 a,b).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The analyses restricted to infants for whom maternal age and these four potential confounders were recorded involved 82.4% ( n = 7,807,310) of the original population (N = 9,473,825) and, thus, could be affected by selection bias. We, therefore, also performed multiple imputation (further details below); however, because missingness affected all variables similarly and is thought to relate to poor infant health 26 which can only be partly captured by the available information, results may still be affected by selection bias.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Missingness of infant, maternal and birth characteristics in HES may correlate with poorer infant health as clinical staff may have fewer opportunities to record these characteristics when infants have high‐care needs. 26 Our complete record analysis of maternal age and risk of CDH subtypes included only individuals with complete infant and maternal characteristics. To assess whether these infants represented a healthier section of the CDH population, we compared them with the full CDH population.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%