Did smallpox cause stillbirths? Maternal smallpox infection, vaccination, and stillbirths in Sweden, 1780-1839.

IF 1.5 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Comparative Population Studies Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-22 DOI:10.1080/00324728.2023.2174266
Eric B Schneider, Sören Edvinsson, Kota Ogasawara
{"title":"Did smallpox cause stillbirths? Maternal smallpox infection, vaccination, and stillbirths in Sweden, 1780-1839.","authors":"Eric B Schneider, Sören Edvinsson, Kota Ogasawara","doi":"10.1080/00324728.2023.2174266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While there is strong evidence that maternal smallpox infection can cause foetal loss, it is not clear whether smallpox infections were a demographically important cause of stillbirths historically. In this paper, we use parish-level data from the Swedish Tabellverket data set for 1780-1839 to test the effect of smallpox on stillbirths quantitatively, analysing periods before and after the introduction of vaccination in 1802. We find that smallpox infection was not a major cause of stillbirths before 1820, because most women contracted smallpox as children and were therefore not susceptible during pregnancy. We do find a small, statistically significant effect of smallpox on stillbirths from 1820 to 1839, when waning immunity from vaccination put a greater share of pregnant women at risk of contracting smallpox. However, the reduced prevalence of smallpox in this period limited its impact on stillbirths. Thus, smallpox was not an important driver of historical stillbirth trends.</p>","PeriodicalId":44592,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Population Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Population Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2023.2174266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While there is strong evidence that maternal smallpox infection can cause foetal loss, it is not clear whether smallpox infections were a demographically important cause of stillbirths historically. In this paper, we use parish-level data from the Swedish Tabellverket data set for 1780-1839 to test the effect of smallpox on stillbirths quantitatively, analysing periods before and after the introduction of vaccination in 1802. We find that smallpox infection was not a major cause of stillbirths before 1820, because most women contracted smallpox as children and were therefore not susceptible during pregnancy. We do find a small, statistically significant effect of smallpox on stillbirths from 1820 to 1839, when waning immunity from vaccination put a greater share of pregnant women at risk of contracting smallpox. However, the reduced prevalence of smallpox in this period limited its impact on stillbirths. Thus, smallpox was not an important driver of historical stillbirth trends.

天花会导致死胎吗?1780-1839年瑞典产妇天花感染、疫苗接种和死胎。
虽然有确凿证据表明母体感染天花会导致胎儿死亡,但尚不清楚历史上天花感染是否是死胎的重要原因。在本文中,我们利用瑞典 Tabellverket 数据集中 1780-1839 年的教区级数据,定量检验了天花对死胎的影响,分析了 1802 年引入疫苗接种之前和之后的时期。我们发现,在 1820 年之前,感染天花并不是死产的主要原因,因为大多数妇女在孩童时期就感染了天花,因此在怀孕期间不易感染。我们确实发现,在 1820 年至 1839 年期间,天花对死胎的影响很小,但在统计意义上却很显著,因为当时接种疫苗后免疫力下降,导致更多孕妇面临感染天花的风险。然而,这一时期天花流行率的降低限制了其对死胎的影响。因此,天花并不是历史上死胎趋势的重要驱动因素。
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
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
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