Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Very Preterm Birth and Preterm Birth Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may exacerbate existing racial/ethnic inequities in preterm birth. Objective: To assess whether racial/ethnic disparities in very preterm birth (VPTB) and preterm birth (PTB) increased during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included 8026 Black, Latina, and White women who gave birth during the study period. A difference-in-differences (DID) analysis of Black vs White disparities in VPTB or PTB in a pandemic cohort was compared with a prepandemic cohort by using electronic medical records obtained from 2 hospitals in New York City. Exposures: Women who delivered from March 28 to July 31, 2020, were considered the pandemic cohort, and women who delivered from March 28 to July 31, 2019, were considered the prepandemic cohort. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction tests for the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were performed using samples obtained via nasopharyngeal swab at the time of admission. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical estimates of gestational age were used to calculate VPTB (<32 weeks) and PTB (<37 weeks). Log binomial regression was performed to estimate Black vs White risk differences, pandemic cohort vs prepandemic cohort risk difference, and an interaction term representing the DID estimator. Covariate-adjusted models included age, insurance, prepregnancy body mass index, and parity. Results: Of 3834 women in the pandemic cohort, 492 (12.8%) self-identified as Black, 678 (17.7%) as Latina, 2012 (52.5%) as White, 408 (10.6%) as Asian, and 244 (6.4%) as other or unspecified race/ethnicity, with approximately half the women 25 to 34 years of age. The prepandemic cohort comprised 4192 women with similar sociodemographic characteristics. In the prepandemic cohort, VPTB risk was 4.4% (20 of 451) and PTB risk was 14.4% (65 of 451) among Black infants compared with 0.8% (17 of 2188) VPTB risk and 7.1% (156 of 2188) PTB risk among White infants. In the pandemic cohort, VPTB risk was 4.3% (21 of 491) and PTB risk was 13.2% (65 of 491) among Black infants compared with 0.5% (10 of 1994) VPTB risk and 7.0% (240 of 1994) PTB risk among White infants. The DID estimators indicated that no increase in Black vs White disparities were found (DID estimator for VPTB, 0.1 additional cases per 100 [95% CI, -2.5 to 2.8]; DID estimator for PTB, 1.1 fewer case per 100 [95% CI, -5.8 to 3.6]). The results were comparable in covariate-adjusted models when limiting the population to women who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. No change was detected in Latina vs White PTB disparities during the pandemic. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of women who gave birth in New York City during the COVID-19 pandemic, no evidence was found for increased racial/ethnic disparities in PTB, among women who tested positive or tested negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Explaining the Black-White Disparity in Preterm Birth: A Consensus Statement From a Multi-Disciplinary Scientific Work Group Convened by the March of Dimes.

In 2017-2019, the March of Dimes convened a workgroup with biomedical, clinical, and epidemiologic expertise to review knowledge of the causes of the persistent Black-White disparity in preterm birth (PTB). Multiple databases were searched to identify hypothesized causes examined in peer-reviewed literature, 33 hypothesized causes were reviewed for whether they plausibly affect PTB and either occur more/less frequently and/or have a larger/smaller effect size among Black women vs. White women. While definitive proof is lacking for most potential causes, most are biologically plausible. No single downstream or midstream factor explains the disparity or its social patterning, however, many likely play limited roles, e.g., while genetic factors likely contribute to PTB, they explain at most a small fraction of the disparity. Research links most hypothesized midstream causes, including socioeconomic factors and stress, with the disparity through their influence on the hypothesized downstream factors. Socioeconomic factors alone cannot explain the disparity's social patterning. Chronic stress could affect PTB through neuroendocrine and immune mechanisms leading to inflammation and immune dysfunction, stress could alter a woman's microbiota, immune response to infection, chronic disease risks, and behaviors, and trigger epigenetic changes influencing PTB risk. As an upstream factor, racism in multiple forms has repeatedly been linked with the plausible midstream/downstream factors, including socioeconomic disadvantage, stress, and toxic exposures. Racism is the only factor identified that directly or indirectly could explain the racial disparities in the plausible midstream/downstream causes and the observed social patterning. Historical and contemporary systemic racism can explain the racial disparities in socioeconomic opportunities that differentially expose African Americans to lifelong financial stress and associated health-harming conditions. Segregation places Black women in stressful surroundings and exposes them to environmental hazards. Race-based discriminatory treatment is a pervasive stressor for Black women of all socioeconomic levels, considering both incidents and the constant vigilance needed to prepare oneself for potential incidents. Racism is a highly plausible, major upstream contributor to the Black-White disparity in PTB through multiple pathways and biological mechanisms. While much is unknown, existing knowledge and core values (equity, justice) support addressing racism in efforts to eliminate the racial disparity in PTB.

Implementation of an electronic genomic and family health history tool in primary prenatal care.

"The Pregnancy and Health Profile," (PHP) is a free genetic risk assessment software tool for primary prenatal providers that collects patient-entered family (FHH), personal, and obstetrical health history, performs risk assessment, and presents the provider with clinical decision support during the prenatal encounter. The tool is freely available for download at www.hughesriskapps.net. We evaluated the implementation of PHP in four geographically diverse clinical sites. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted for patients seen prior to the study period and for patients who used the PHP to collect data on documentation of FHH, discussion of cystic fibrosis (CF) and hemoglobinopathy (HB) carrier screening, and CF and HB interventions (tests, referrals). Five hundred pre-implementation phase and 618 implementation phase charts were reviewed. Documentation of a 3-generation FHH or pedigree improved at three sites; patient race/ethnicity at three sites, father of the baby (FOB) race/ethnicity at all sites, and ancestry for the patient and FOB at three sites (P < 0.001-0001). CF counseling improved for implementation phase patients at one site (8% vs. 48%, P < 0.0001) and CF screening/referrals at two (2% vs. 14%, P < 0.0001; 6% vs. 14%; P = 0.05). Counseling and intervention rates did not increase for HB. This preliminary study suggests that the PHP can improve documentation of FHH, race, and ancestry, as well as the compliance with current CF counseling and intervention guidelines in some prenatal clinics. Future evaluation of the PHP should include testing in a larger number of clinical environments, assessment of additional performance measures, and evaluation of the system's overall clinical utility.

Comparing CenteringPregnancy® to standard prenatal care plus prenatal education.

BACKGROUND: There is significant evidence to support the importance of prenatal care in preventing adverse outcomes such as preterm birth and low infant birth weight. Previous studies have indicated that the benefits of prenatal care are not evenly distributed throughout the social strata. In addition, emerging evidence suggests that among particular populations, rates of preterm birth are unchanged or increasing. This suggests that an alternate care model is necessary, one that seeks to addresses some of the myriad of social factors that also contribute to adverse birth outcomes. In previous studies, the group prenatal care model CenteringPregnancy® had been shown to reduce adverse birth outcomes, but to date, no comparison had been made with a model that included prenatal education. This study sought to investigate whether any significant difference remained within the comparison groups when both models accounted for social factors. METHODS: This analysis was based on survey data collected from a prospective cohort of pregnant women through the All Our Babies Study in Calgary, Alberta. RESULTS: At baseline, there were significant differences between the comparison groups in their psychosocial health, with the women in the CenteringPregnancy® group scoring higher levels of depressive symptoms, stress and anxiety. At four months postpartum, the differences between the groups were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that CenteringPregnancy® can recruit and retain a demographically vulnerable group of women with a constellation of risk factors for poor pregnancy and birth outcomes, including poverty, language barriers and poor mental health. Post program, the rates of stress, anxiety and depression were similar to other women with more social and financial advantage. These findings suggest that CenteringPregnancy® may be a community based care strategy that contributes to improved mental health, knowledge, and behaviours to optimize outcomes for mothers and children.

The All Our Babies pregnancy cohort: design, methods, and participant characteristics.

BACKGROUND: The prospective cohort study design is ideal for examining diseases of public health importance, as its inherent temporal nature renders it advantageous for studying early life influences on health outcomes and research questions of aetiological significance. This paper will describe the development and characteristics of the All Our Babies (AOB) study, a prospective pregnancy cohort in Calgary, Alberta, Canada designed to examine determinants of maternal, infant, and child outcomes and identify barriers and facilitators in health care utilization. METHODS: Women were recruited from health care offices, communities, and through Calgary Laboratory Services before 25 weeks gestation from May 2008 to December 2010. Participants completed two questionnaires during pregnancy, a third at 4 months postpartum, and are currently being followed-up with questionnaires at 12, 24, and 36 months. Data was collected on pregnancy history, demographics, lifestyle, health care utilization, physical and mental health, parenting, and child developmental outcomes and milestones. In addition, biological/serological and genetic markers can be extracted from collected maternal and cord blood samples. RESULTS: A total of 4011 pregnant women were eligible for recruitment into the AOB study. Of this, 3388 women completed at least one survey. The majority of participants were less than 35 years of age, Caucasian, Canadian born, married or in a common-law relationship, well-educated, and reported household incomes above the Calgary median. Women who discontinued after the first survey (n=123) were typically younger, non-Caucasian, foreign-born, had lower education and household income levels, were less likely to be married or in a common-law relationship, and had poor psychosocial health in early pregnancy. In general, AOB participants reflect the pregnant and parenting population at local and provincial levels, and perinatal indicators from the study are comparable to perinatal surveillance data. CONCLUSIONS: The extensive and rich data collected in the AOB cohort provides the opportunity to answer complex questions about the relationships between biology, early experiences, and developmental outcomes. This cohort will contribute to the understanding of the biologic mechanisms and social/environmental pathways underlying associations between early and later life outcomes, gene-environment interactions, and developmental trajectories among children.

Genetic and environmental contributions to racial disparities in preterm birth.

The preterm birth rate exceeds 12% in the United States, and preterm birth continues to be a clinical and public health challenge globally. Even though preterm birth is a major contributor to infant mortality and lifelong morbidity, there are few effective strategies to predict preterm birth and few clinical interventions to prevent it. Genomic research approaches that identify risk factors at the intersection of genetics and the environment will likely provide insights. Both genetic and environmental factors are known to contribute to the racial disparity seen in preterm birth. Through the identification of relevant gene-environment interactions that contribute to preterm birth and may underlie the racial disparity in preterm birth, research that will translate to clinical practice and ultimately prevent a number of preterm births is possible.

Assessment of cumulative evidence on genetic associations: interim guidelines.

Established guidelines for causal inference in epidemiological studies may be inappropriate for genetic associations. A consensus process was used to develop guidance criteria for assessing cumulative epidemiologic evidence in genetic associations. A proposed semi-quantitative index assigns three levels for the amount of evidence, extent of replication, and protection from bias, and also generates a composite assessment of 'strong', 'moderate' or 'weak' epidemiological credibility. In addition, we discuss how additional input and guidance can be derived from biological data. Future empirical research and consensus development are needed to develop an integrated model for combining epidemiological and biological evidence in the rapidly evolving field of investigation of genetic factors.

Linking family history in obstetric and pediatric care: assessing risk for genetic disease and birth defects.

Family history captures the collective influence of shared genetic susceptibility, shared environmental factors, and common behaviors within families. Throughout the reproductive continuum, pediatricians, obstetricians, family practitioners, genetic counselors, and other clinicians can work with families to elicit relevant family history information and factor it into risk-assessment calculations and, when appropriate, decision-making. Current screening tools have focused on understanding the risk for single-gene disorders, chromosomal conditions, and teratogen exposures during the preconception, prenatal, and interconception periods. More research and data are needed to understand how family history influences risk for a wide variety of complex birth outcomes such as preterm birth, stillbirth, and many birth defects. With a better understanding of the impact of family history on many adverse birth outcomes, tools for the collection of a broader set of pertinent family history information must be developed.