Maternal Age Differences in Interpregnancy Interval and Preterm Birth Associations Accounting for Multiple Epidemiologic Biases.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Julie M Petersen, Mahsa M Yazdy, Anne Marie Darling, Martha M Werler
{"title":"Maternal Age Differences in Interpregnancy Interval and Preterm Birth Associations Accounting for Multiple Epidemiologic Biases.","authors":"Julie M Petersen, Mahsa M Yazdy, Anne Marie Darling, Martha M Werler","doi":"10.1111/ppe.70022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People who recently gave birth are strongly advised to wait 6 months before attempting pregnancy. Interpregnancy intervals (IPI) of ≥ 18 months are considered optimal. Current guidance is not tailored based on maternal characteristics (e.g., age).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We evaluated whether maternal age modifies IPI-preterm birth (PTB) associations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From a US retrospective cohort of multiparae (1997-2011), we categorised IPI: < 6, 6-11, 12-17, 18-23 (reference), 24-59 or ≥ 60 months. PTB occurred before 37 0/7 weeks' gestation. We estimated risk ratios (RR) between IPI and PTB using modified Poisson regression, adjusted for potential confounders and stratified by age at prior delivery: < 25 (n = 2484), 25-29 (n = 1626) or ≥ 30 (n = 1209) years. We conducted quantitative bias analysis to adjust for volunteer bias and dependent misclassification between IPI and gestational length (since both are calculated using the estimated start of pregnancy). We computed E-values when RR lower bounds of the 95% simulation intervals were > 1.00.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Estimates were imprecise due to small numbers. However, in terms of general patterns, PTB risk was highest with < 6 months IPI in all age groups (covariate-adjusted RR point estimates ≥ 1.30). The strongest associations were observed among 25-29 years. For ≥ 30 years, PTB risk was lowest with 6-17 months IPI. After multiple bias adjustments, estimates tended to move downward, but similar patterns remained. For 25-29 years, the lower bound of the 95% simulation interval for < 6 versus 18-23 months IPI was > 1.00, with an E-value of 3.82, suggesting unmeasured confounding would need to be very strong to explain the association.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Estimates were imprecise. However, our study adds to growing evidence that IPI associations may be weaker among older individuals. Older individuals with shorter IPI may have lower PTB risk than those with currently recommended IPI, but more research is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":19698,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ppe.70022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People who recently gave birth are strongly advised to wait 6 months before attempting pregnancy. Interpregnancy intervals (IPI) of ≥ 18 months are considered optimal. Current guidance is not tailored based on maternal characteristics (e.g., age).

Objectives: We evaluated whether maternal age modifies IPI-preterm birth (PTB) associations.

Methods: From a US retrospective cohort of multiparae (1997-2011), we categorised IPI: < 6, 6-11, 12-17, 18-23 (reference), 24-59 or ≥ 60 months. PTB occurred before 37 0/7 weeks' gestation. We estimated risk ratios (RR) between IPI and PTB using modified Poisson regression, adjusted for potential confounders and stratified by age at prior delivery: < 25 (n = 2484), 25-29 (n = 1626) or ≥ 30 (n = 1209) years. We conducted quantitative bias analysis to adjust for volunteer bias and dependent misclassification between IPI and gestational length (since both are calculated using the estimated start of pregnancy). We computed E-values when RR lower bounds of the 95% simulation intervals were > 1.00.

Results: Estimates were imprecise due to small numbers. However, in terms of general patterns, PTB risk was highest with < 6 months IPI in all age groups (covariate-adjusted RR point estimates ≥ 1.30). The strongest associations were observed among 25-29 years. For ≥ 30 years, PTB risk was lowest with 6-17 months IPI. After multiple bias adjustments, estimates tended to move downward, but similar patterns remained. For 25-29 years, the lower bound of the 95% simulation interval for < 6 versus 18-23 months IPI was > 1.00, with an E-value of 3.82, suggesting unmeasured confounding would need to be very strong to explain the association.

Conclusions: Estimates were imprecise. However, our study adds to growing evidence that IPI associations may be weaker among older individuals. Older individuals with shorter IPI may have lower PTB risk than those with currently recommended IPI, but more research is needed.

多流行病学偏差解释区间和早产关联的母亲年龄差异。
背景:强烈建议最近分娩的人在尝试怀孕前等待6个月。解释间隔(IPI)≥18个月被认为是最佳的。目前的指导没有根据产妇的特点(如年龄)进行调整。目的:我们评估产妇年龄是否会改变ipi与早产(PTB)的关系。方法:从美国多期回顾性队列(1997-2011)中,我们将IPI分类为1.00。结果:由于数量少,估计不准确。然而,就一般模式而言,PTB风险最高,为1.00,e值为3.82,这表明未测量的混杂因素需要非常强才能解释这种关联。结论:估计不准确。然而,我们的研究增加了越来越多的证据,表明IPI关联在老年人中可能较弱。较短IPI的老年人可能比目前推荐的IPI患者患PTB的风险更低,但还需要更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
84
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology crosses the boundaries between the epidemiologist and the paediatrician, obstetrician or specialist in child health, ensuring that important paediatric and perinatal studies reach those clinicians for whom the results are especially relevant. In addition to original research articles, the Journal also includes commentaries, book reviews and annotations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信