MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406708463 · doi:10.2196/58944

Assessing the Impact of Distance Traveled and Birth Volumes of Hospital Maternity Units on Newborn Outcomes: Population-Based Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4406708463 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna Cantarutti, Riccardo Boracchini, Roberto Bellù, Raffaella Ronco, Federico Rea, Anna Locatelli, Rinaldo Zanini, Giovanni Corrao

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della RicercaMinistero della Salute
KeywordsMedicineChildbirthPopulationApgar scoreCohortDemographyPediatricsPregnancyBirth weightEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The centralization of childbirth and newborn care in large maternity units has become increasingly prevalent in Europe. While this trend offers potential benefits such as specialized care and improved outcomes, it can also lead to longer travel and waiting times, especially for women in rural areas. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the association between hospital maternity unit (HMU) volumes, road travel distance (RTD) to the hospital, and other neonatal outcomes. Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study including all live births in hospitals without intensive care units between 2016 and 2019 in the Lombardy region, Italy. Given the hierarchical structure of our data (births nested within hospitals), we employed log-binomial regression models with random intercepts to estimate relative risks and 95% CIs for evaluating the association between HMU volumes (≥1500 births/year) and RTD (<5 km) with the risk of being transferred and/or death after birth (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included a low Apgar score at 5 minutes and low adherence to antenatal care (ANC). We controlled for several potential confounders including adherence to the ANC pathway for the primary and low Apgar outcomes. To explore the influence of HMU volumes on the primary outcome, we identified the fractional polynomial model that best described this relationship. Results: Of 65,083 live births, 71% (n=45,955) occurred in low-volume hospitals (<1000 births/year), 21% (n=13,560) involved long-distance travel (>15 km), 1% (n=735) were transferred and/or died after birth, 0.5% (n=305) had a low Apgar score at 5 minutes, and 64% (n=41,317) completely adhered to ANC. The risk of transfer and/or death increased as HMU volume decreased, ranging from 1% for hospitals with 1000-1500 births/year to a 3.6-fold high risk for hospitals with <500 births/year (compared to high-volume hospitals). Travel distance did not affect the primary outcome. Neither HMU volume nor RTD were associated with low Apgar scores. Conversely, the risk of complete adherence to ANC decreased with lower HMU volumes but increased with shorter RTD. Additionally, high-volume hospitals demonstrated a decreasing trend in the frequency of the primary outcome, with transfer and/or death rates ranging from 2% to 0.5% and flattening to 0.5% in hospitals, with activity volume ≥1000 mean births/year. Conclusions: Our findings showed an excess risk of neonatal transfer and/or death for live births in HMUs with low activity volumes without an intensive care unit. In contrast, RTD primarily affected adherence to ANC. Moreover, data suggest that 1000 births/year could be an optimal cutoff for maternity hospitals to ensure an appropriate standard of care at delivery.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→