Independent and cumulative effects of risk factors associated with stillbirths in 50 low- and middle-income countries: A multi-country cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Early identification of high-risk pregnancies could reduce stillbirths, yet remains a challenge in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aims to estimate the associations between easily observable risk factors and stillbirths, and construct a risk score which could be adopted in LMICs to identify pregnancies with high risk of stillbirths. Methods: Using the most recent Demographic and Health Surveys from 50 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with available data between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2021, we analysed a total of 22 factors associated with stillbirths in a series of single-adjusted and mutually adjusted logistic regression models. Upon identification of the risk factors with the strongest associations, we constructed a risk score on the basis of the magnitude of the β coefficient to examine the cumulative effects of risk factors on stillbirths. To assess whether the associations between risk scores and stillbirths were moderated by protective factors, we added an interaction term between the identified protective factor and risk scores to the regression model. We also conducted two sets of subgroup analyses for previous history of pregnancy and maternal age at pregnancy and four sets of supplementary analyses to test the robustness of the results. Findings: < 0.001) times more likely to have their pregnancies ending up as stillbirths. However, these associations were weakened if the head of household was female. Interpretation: Our study suggested that short maternal height, low socioeconomic status, previous stillbirth history, low maternal education, and very short interpregnancy interval had the strongest associations with stillbirths. The construction of risk scores using easily observable risk factors could be an effective way to identify high-risk pregnancies in resource-poor settings. Funding: This research was supported by Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen (NO. SZSM202111001) and China National Natural Science Foundation (NO. 72203119).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".