Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-jtdwj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T06:58:14.945Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new approach to assessing the effect of birth order on the outcome of pregnancy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

P. L. Yudkin  and
M. Baras
P. L. Yudkin
Affiliation:
Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Oxford, Jerusalem
M. Baras
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Ecology, Hebrew University-Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A new approach is suggested for assessing the relationship between birth order and pregnancy risk. Population data are used to estimate the risk of a poor pregnancy outcome after different reproductive histories. The risk of a poor outcome at the first pregnancy appears to be twice that at subsequent pregnancies, but no change in risk is observed between the second and fifth birth orders. If there has been a previous poor pregnancy outcome, the risk of another is increased four-fold.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , July 1983 , pp. 307 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bakketeig, L.S. & Hoffman, H.J. (1979) Pregnancy order and reproductive loss. Br. med. J. 2, 693.Google Scholar
Billewicz, W.Z. (1973) Some implications of self-selection for pregnancy. Br. J.prev. soc. Med. 27, 49.Google Scholar
Butler, N.R. & Alberman, E.D. (1969) Perinatal Problems: The Second Report of the 1958 British Perinatal Mortality Survey, p. 55. Livingstone, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Butler, N.R. & Bonham, D.G. (1963) Perinatal Mortality: The First Report of the British Perinatal Mortality Survey, p. 17. Livingstone, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Cox, D.R. (1970) Analysis'of Binary Data. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
Davies, A.M., Prywes, R., Tzur, B., Weiskopf, P. & Sterk, V.V. (1969) The Jerusalem Perinatal Study. 1. Design and organization of a continuing, community-based, record-linked survey. Isr. J. med. Sci. 5,1095.Google ScholarPubMed
Edwards, L.E., Alton, I.R., Barrada, M.I. & Hakanson, E.Y. (1979) Pregnancy in the underweight woman. Course, outcome and growth patterns of the infant. Am. J. Obstet. Gynec. 135, 297.Google Scholar
Eisner, V., Brazie, J.V., Pratt, M.W. & Hexter, A.C. (1979) The risk of low birth weight. Am. J. publ. Hlth, 69,887Google Scholar
Fedrick, J. & Adelstein, P. (1973) Influence of pregnancy spacing on outcome of pregnancy. Br. med. J. 4,753.Google Scholar
Fedrick, J. & Adelstein, P. (1977) Preceding pregnancy loss as an index of risk of stillbirth or neonatal death in the present pregnancy. Biol. Neonate, 31, 84.Google Scholar
Gaziano, E.P., Freeman, D.W. & Allen, T.E. (1981) Antenatal prediction of women at increased risk for infants with low birth weight. Am. J. Obstet. Gynec. 140, 99.Google Scholar
Gendell, M. & Hellegers, E. (1973) The influence of the changes in maternal age, birth order and color on the changing perinatal mortality, Baltimore, Md, 1961–66. Health Services Reports, 88, 733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golding, J. (1979) Perinatal epidemiology in Wonderland. Br. med. J. 2,1436.Google Scholar
Harlap, S. & Davies, A.M. (1978) The Pill and Births: The Jerusalem Study. National Institute of Child Health and Development, Bethesda, Md, USA.Google Scholar
Harlap, S., Davies, A.M., Grover, N.B. & Prywes, R. (1977) The Jerusalem Perinatal Study: the first decade 1964–1973. Isr. J. med. Sci. 13, 1073.Google Scholar
James, W.H. (1976) Birth order, maternal age and birth interval in epidemiology. Int. J. pidemiol. 5, 131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legg, S., Davies, A.M., Prywes, R., Sterk, V.V. & Weiskopf, P. (1970) Patterns of low birth weight in West Jerusalem with special reference to maternal origin. Br. J. prev. soc. Med. 24,89.Google ScholarPubMed
Leridon, H. (1976) Facts and artifacts in the study of intrauterine mortality: a reconsideration from pregnancy histories. Popul. Stud. 30, 319.Google Scholar
Macmahon, B., Kovar, M.G. & Feldman, J.J. (1973) Infant mortality rates: Relationships with mother's reproductive history. Vital Health Stat. 15, 1.Google Scholar
Mantel, N. (1979) Perinatal mortality by birth order. Br. med. J. 2, 1147.Google Scholar
Newcombe, H.B. (1965) Environmental versus genetic interpretations of birth-order effects. Eugen. Q. 12, 90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prasad, R. & Prasad, A. (1978) Survival sequence of infants: a factorial analysis. J. biosoc. Sci. 10,17.Google Scholar
Resseguie, L.J. (1973a) Changes in stillbirth ratios resulting from changing fashions in age of chiidbearing. Social Biol. 20,173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Resseguie, L.J. (1973b) Influence of age, birth order and reproductive compensation on stillbirth ratios. J. biosoc. Sci. 5,443.Google Scholar
Roman, E., Doyle, P., Beral, V., Alberman, E. & Pharaoh, P. (1978) Fetal loss, gravidity and pregnancy order. Early hum. Dev. 2,131.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, E.R., Mazumdar, S.M. & Logrillo, V.M. (1972) Long term trends in perinatal deaths among offspring of mothers with previous child losses. Am. J. Epidemiol. 96, 255.Google Scholar
Scott Russell, C., Taylor, R. & Maddison, R.N. (1966) Some effects of smoking in pregnancy. J. Obstet. Gynaec. Br. Commonw. 73, 742.Google Scholar
Thomson, A.M., Billewicz, W.Z. & Hytten, F.E. (1968) The assessment of fetal growth. J. Obstet. Gynaec. Br. Commonw. 75,903.Google Scholar
Zimmer, B.G. (1979) Consequences of the number and spacing of pregnancies on outcome, and of pregnancy outcome on spacing. Social Biol. 26, 161.Google Scholar