MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Short-Term and Long-Term Mortality Risk After Preterm Birth

2024· article· en· W4404568140 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Asma M. Ahmed, Sonia M. Grandi, Eleanor Pullenayegum, Sarah D. McDonald, Marc Beltempo, Shahirose Premji, Jason D. Pole, Fabiana Bacchini, Prakesh S. Shah, Petros Pechlivanoglou

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesMcGill UniversityQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversitySickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineProportional hazards modelHazard ratioConfoundingGestational ageGestationPopulationCohort studyCohortDemographyRelative riskObstetricsPediatricsPregnancyConfidence intervalInternal medicineBiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Preterm birth (PTB) is a leading cause of neonatal mortality. However, evidence on mortality beyond the neonatal period is limited, especially in North America. Objective: To examine associations of PTB with all-cause and cause-specific mortality from birth through 23 to 36 years of age. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based matched cohort study of live births in Canada included individuals born between January 1, 1983, and December 31, 1996, and followed up until December 31, 2019. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2023, to April 30, 2024. Exposure: PTBs, between 24 and 37 weeks' gestation (with gestational age [GA]-specific subcategories of 24 to 27 weeks, 28 to 31 weeks, 32 to 33 weeks, and 34 to 36 weeks) compared with term births (37-41 weeks' gestation). Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality were the main outcomes. Risk differences (RDs) and risk ratios (RRs) were estimated for all-cause mortality using log-binomial regressions and hazard ratios were estimated for cause-specific mortality using Cox proportional hazards regression models (censoring individuals who died from other causes) within prespecified age intervals (ages 0-11 months and ages 1-5, 6-12, 13-17, 18-28, and 29-36 years). Observed confounding was accounted for using coarsened exact matching on baseline characteristics. Results: Of 4 998 560 births (54.2% male), 6.9% were born preterm (with GA-specific subcategories of 0.3% born at 24-27 weeks, 0.6% at 28-31 weeks, 0.8% at 32-33 weeks, and 5.1% at 34-36 weeks). During a median of 29 years of follow-up, 72 662 individuals died (14 312 born preterm and 58 350 at term). PTB was associated with an increased risk of death in all age intervals, with the highest RDs and RRs from birth through infancy (ages 0-11 months) (RD, 2.29% [95% CI, 2.23%-2.35%]; RR, 11.61 [95% CI, 11.09-12.15]) and in early childhood (ages 1-5 years) (RD, 0.34% [95% CI, 0.31%-0.36%]; RR, 2.79 [95% CI, 2.61-2.98]) and the lowest RDs and RRs among those between ages 18 and 28 years (RD, 0.07% [95% CI, 0.04%-0.10%]; RR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.07-1.19]). We identified increased risks of mortality associated with several causes, including respiratory, circulatory, and digestive system disorders; nervous system, endocrine, and infectious diseases; cancers; congenital malformations; and conditions originating in the perinatal period. No associations were found for external causes of deaths. Associations by GA categories suggested lower risks with higher GA. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this population-based matched cohort study suggest that individuals born preterm were at an increased risk of death from birth until their third and fourth decades of life, with higher risks as GA decreased. Some of these associations may have been partly due to underlying health determinants that affected PTB and mortality. These findings suggest that PTB should be recognized as a risk factor for mortality and could inform preventive strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207