Parents’ age at birth and daughters’ time to pregnancy: a study within the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STUDY QUESTION: Is parents' age at birth associated with daughters' fecundability? SUMMARY ANSWER: Daughters born to mothers <25 years or fathers ≥35 years had slightly lower fecundability. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Two recent studies reported lower fecundability in women born to mothers <20 years, which may be partly due to daughters of young mothers being less likely to plan their pregnancies. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective cohort study of 58 496 pregnancy planners (4290 of whom conceived with treatment) and 14 194 non-planners enrolled in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) between 2000 and 2008, linked with the Medical Birth Registry of Norway. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants were born in Norway between 1967 and 1990. We estimated fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% CI as a function of both parents' (F1) age at the daughter's (F2) birth among non-treated planners and the relative risk of time to pregnancy (TTP) ≥12 months or treatment among all planners. We explored whether daughters of young mothers were under-represented among planners, compared with the underlying population. Finally, we estimated FRs after adding non-planners, randomly assigned to conceiving in the first cycle with probabilities of 0.60 and 0.70. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: For both mother and father, the reference category was 25-29 years. Fecundability was slightly lower among daughters of older fathers (FRs (95% CI): 0.95 (0.92, 0.98) for F1 father's age 35-39 years and 0.93 (0.89, 0.97) for ≥40 years) and daughters of young mothers (0.92 (0.89, 0.96) for F1 mother's age <20 years and 0.97 (0.95, 0.99) for 20-24 years). Results were similar for the composite outcome TTP ≥ 12 months or treatment, although driven by TTP ≥ 12. Compared with Norwegian-born women with ≥1 pregnancy, planners born to mothers <20 years were underrepresented. Including non-planners with very high fecundability weakened the association with mother's age <20 years. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was a pregnancy cohort with retrospectively reported information on planning and TTP. Selection bias appears unlikely to fully explain the association with mother's age <20 years. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Daughters of young mothers or older fathers may have slightly lower fecundability. If corroborated, the finding about older paternal age is relevant, given the widespread tendency to delay childbearing. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was partly funded by the Research Council of Norway (project no. 320656), and through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project no. 262700). M.C.M. has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 947684). No competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».