Maternal Mortality: A National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Panel Report.

The National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Pathways to Prevention panel on postpartum health provides a consensus statement on the evidence, research gaps, and future priorities to prevent maternal morbidity and mortality. The panel reviewed an NIH-commissioned evidence review and workshop that included epidemiologic studies, demonstration interventions, and other maternal morbidity and mortality research to create these national recommendations. The panel concludes that a maternal morbidity and mortality crisis reflects a systemic failure of current U.S. health care, research efforts, and social policies. The panel recommends improving maternal health through a "maternal morbidity and mortality prevention moonshot" that adopts a comprehensive, multilevel life course conceptual framework; strengthens the research methods used within the science of maternal health; establishes and conducts national prevention, treatment, and policy interventions; and reimburses evidence-informed clinical approaches to improve maternal health across the life course. Without a national focus on fundamentally transformative interventions and other initiatives aimed at redressing structural racism and inequities in health care, current interventions and clinical advances in maternal morbidity and mortality prevention will remain tragically insufficient.

The Black-White Disparity in Preterm Birth: Race or Racism?

Policy Points Racism is an upstream determinant of health that influences health through many midstream and downstream factors. This Perspective traces multiple plausible causal pathways from racism to preterm birth. Although the article focuses on the Black-White disparity in preterm birth, a key population health indicator, it has implications for many other health outcomes. It is erroneous to assume by default that underlying biological differences explain racial disparities in health. Appropriate science-based policies are needed to address racial disparities in health; this will require addressing racism.

African immigrants' favorable preterm birth rates challenge genetic etiology of the Black-White disparity in preterm birth.

Background: We examined over a million California birth records for 2010 through 2021 to investigate whether disparities in preterm birth (PTB) by nativity and race support the widely held but hitherto unsubstantiated belief that genetic differences explain the persistent Black-White disparity in PTB. Methods: We examined PTB rates and risk ratios among African-, Caribbean-, and U.S.-born Black women compared to U.S.-born White women. Multivariate analyses adjusted for maternal age, education, number of live births, delivery payer, trimester of prenatal care initiation, pre-pregnancy BMI, smoking, and prevalence of poverty in a woman's residence census tract; and for paternal education. Results: In adjusted analyses, African-born Black women's PTB rates were no different from those of U.S.-born White women. Discussion: The results add to prior evidence making a genetic etiology for the racial disparity in PTB unlikely. If genetic differences tied to "race" explained the Black-White disparity in PTB among U.S.-born women, the African immigrants in this study would have had higher rates of PTB, not the lower rates observed. Multiple explanations for the observed patterns and their implications are discussed. Failure to distinguish causes of PTB from causes of the racial disparity in PTB have likely contributed to erroneous attribution of the racial disparity to genetic differences. Based on the literature, unmeasured experiences of racism, including racism-related stress and adverse environmental exposures, are plausible explanations for the PTB disparity between Black and White U.S.-born women. The favorable birth outcomes of African-born Black immigrants may reflect less exposure to racism during sensitive life periods, e.g., childhood, when they were in African countries, where Black people are in the racial majority.

Severe maternal hardships are associated with food insecurity among low-income/lower-income women during pregnancy: results from the 2012-2014 California maternal infant health assessment.

BACKGROUND: Assess the associations between ten severe maternal hardships and food insecurity experienced during pregnancy. METHODS: Data on 14,274 low-income/lower-income women (below 400% of the income to federal poverty guideline ratio) from the statewide-representative 2010-2012 California Maternal and Infant Health Assessment were used to estimate food security status prevalence. Prevalence of severe maternal hardships by food security status was estimated. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the associations between severe maternal hardship and food security status, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Food insecurity was common among low- and lower-income pregnant women in California; 23.4% food insecure and an additional 11.5% marginally secure. In adjusted analysis, nine of ten hardships were associated with food security status. Only the respondent or someone close to the respondent having a problem with alcohol or drugs was not associated with food security status after adjusting for socioeconomic factors. Husband/partner losing a job, depressive symptoms, not having practical support and intimate partner violence were consistently associated with marginal, low and very low food security status. Each additional severe maternal hardship a woman experienced during pregnancy was associated with a 36% greater risk of reporting marginal food security (Relative Risk Ratio 1.36, 95% CI: 1.27, 1.47), 54% for low food security (Relative Risk Ratio 1.54, 95% CI: 1.44, 1.64), and 99% for very low food security (Relative Risk Ratio 1.99, 95% CI: 1.83, 2.15). CONCLUSIONS: Food security status was strongly linked with several maternal hardships that could jeopardize maternal and/or infant health. Services-including prenatal care and nutritional assistance-for a large proportion of pregnant women should address a wide range of serious unmet social needs including food insecurity.

Systemic And Structural Racism: Definitions, Examples, Health Damages, And Approaches To Dismantling.

Racism is not always conscious, explicit, or readily visible-often it is systemic and structural. Systemic and structural racism are forms of racism that are pervasively and deeply embedded in systems, laws, written or unwritten policies, and entrenched practices and beliefs that produce, condone, and perpetuate widespread unfair treatment and oppression of people of color, with adverse health consequences. Examples include residential segregation, unfair lending practices and other barriers to home ownership and accumulating wealth, schools' dependence on local property taxes, environmental injustice, biased policing and sentencing of men and boys of color, and voter suppression policies. This article defines systemic and structural racism, using examples; explains how they damage health through many causal pathways; and suggests approaches to dismantling them. Because systemic and structural racism permeate all sectors and areas, addressing them will require mutually reinforcing actions in multiple sectors and places; acknowledging their existence is a crucial first step.

Abandon "Race." Focus on Racism.

The concept of "race" emerged in the 1600s with the trans-Atlantic slave trade, justifying slavery; it has been used to justify exploitation, denigration and decimation. Since then, despite contrary scientific evidence, a deeply-rooted belief has taken hold that "race," indicated by, e.g., skin color or facial features, reflects fundamental biological differences. We propose that the term "race" be abandoned, substituting "ethnic group" while retaining "racism," with the goal of dismantling it. Despite scientific consensus that "race" is a social construct, in official U.S. classifications, "Hispanic"/"Latino" is an "ethnicity" while African American/Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander, and European American/White are "races." There is no scientific basis for this. Each grouping reflects ancestry in a particular continent/region and shared history, e.g., the genocide and expropriation of Indigenous peoples, African Americans' enslavement, oppression and ongoing disenfranchisement, Latin America's Indigenous roots and colonization. Given migrations over millennia, each group reflects extensive genetic admixture across and within continents/regions. "Ethnicity" evokes social characteristics such as history, language, beliefs, customs. "Race" reinforces notions of inherent biological differences based on physical appearance. While not useful as a biological category, geographic ancestry is a key social category for monitoring and addressing health inequities because of racism's profound influence on health and well-being. We must continue to collect and analyze data on the population groups that have been racialized into socially constructed categories called "races." We must not, however, continue to use that term; it is not the only obstacle to dismantling racism, but it is a significant one.

School nutrition laws in the US: do they influence obesity among youth in a racially/ethnically diverse state?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the separate or combined effects of state and national nutrition policies regulating food and beverages in schools on child overweight/obesity (OV/OB) and related racial/ethnic disparities. We investigated the influence of school nutrition policies enacted in California, independently and in combination with the United States' national policy "Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act" (HHFKA) on childhood OV/OB and racial/ethnic disparities. SUBJECTS/METHODS: An interrupted time series design was used with data from 12,363,089 child-level records on 5th- and 7th-graders in California public schools to estimate sex- and racial/ethnic-specific time trends in OV/OB prevalence during three periods: before the California nutrition policies (2002-2004); when only California policies were in effect (2005-2012); and when they were in effect simultaneously with HHFKA (2013-2016). RESULTS: Before the state's policies, OV/OB prevalence increased annually among children in most subgroups. Improvements in OV/OB trends were observed for almost all groups after the California policies were in effect, with further improvements after the addition of HFFKA. The total change in annual log-odds of OV/OB, comparing the periods with both state and federal policies versus no policies, ranged from -0.08 to -0.01 and varied by grade, sex, and race/ethnicity. Within each sex and grade, the greatest changes were among African-American (-0.08 to -0.02, all p < 0.05) followed by Latino children (-0.06 to -0.01, all p < 0.05). Although disparities narrowed among these groups versus White children after the dual policy period, disparities remained large. CONCLUSIONS: State and national nutrition policies for schools may have contributed to containing the upward trend in childhood OV/OB and racial/ethnic OV/OB disparities within California. However, sizable OV/OB prevalence and disparities persist. To end the epidemic, promote healthy weight and increase health equity, future efforts should strengthen state and national policies to improve food quality in schools, particularly those serving populations with the highest OV/OB prevalence.

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.

A Prematurity Collaborative Birth Equity Consensus Statement for Mothers and Babies.

INTRODUCTION: In 2016, March of Dimes (MOD) launched its Prematurity Collaborative to engage a broad cross section of national experts to address persistent and widening racial disparities in preterm birth by achieving equity and demonstrated improvements in preterm birth. African-American and Native American women continue to have disproportionate rates of preterm birth and maternal death. As part of the Collaborative, MOD created the Health Equity Workgroup whose task was the creation of a scientific consensus statement articulating core values and a call to action to achieve equity in preterm birth utilizing health equity and social determinants of health frameworks. METHODS: Health Equity Workgroup members engaged in-person and virtually to discuss key determinant contributors and resolutions for disparate maternal and birth outcomes. Workgroup members then drafted the Birth Equity Consensus Statement that contained value statements and a call to action. The birth equity consensus statement was presented at professional conferences to seek broader support. This article highlights the background and context towards arriving at the core values and call to action, which are the two major components of the consensus statement and presents the core values and call to action themselves. RESULTS: The result was the creation of a birth equity consensus statement that highlights risks and protections of social determinants based on the prevailing science, and identifies promising solutions for reducing preterm birth and eliminating racial disparities. CONCLUSION: The birth equity consensus statement provides a mandate, guiding the work of March of Dimes and the broader MCH community, for equity-based research, practice, and policy advocacy at local, state, and federal levels. SIGNIFICANCE: This field report adds to the current knowledge base on racial and ethnic disparities in birth and maternal health outcomes. Research has documented the science behind eliminating health disparities. Scientists and practitioners should continue to explore in practice how the social determinants of birth and maternal health, which manifest historically and contemporarily, can be addressed.

Medical Provider Promotion of Oral Health and Women's Receipt of Dental Care During Pregnancy.

Objectives Dental care during pregnancy is important. We examined whether promotion of oral health by medical providers during pregnancy and pregnant women's receipt of dental care improved between 2009 and 2012 in California. Methods We used population-based postpartum survey data collected during 2009 (n = 3105) and 2012 (n = 6810) to compare the prevalence of women's reports that, during pregnancy, (a) their medical providers discussed oral health and/or suggested they see a dentist, and (b) they received dental care. Results Between 2009 and 2012, the proportion of women reporting that their medical providers talked about oral health or referred them to a dentist increased significantly overall (from 36 to 42%, and 21-26%, respectively, p < 0.001). The proportion of women with a dental visit during pregnancy also increased, from 38% in 2009 to 42% in 2012 (p < 0.005). The improvements were largely among women of lower income and education levels, those covered by Medi-Cal, and Latinas. Women whose medical providers promoted oral health care were approximately two times more likely to report having had a dental visit during pregnancy, even after adjusting for several potential confounders. Conclusions for Practice Characteristics of women reporting that their medical providers promoted, and that they received, dental care during pregnancy in 2012 suggests that the increases in promotion and use of oral health care were largely concentrated among Medi-Cal recipients. Further improvement is needed for all populations of pregnant women. Both public and private providers need to incorporate promotion of and referral for dental care into routine prenatal care protocols.

Swimming Against the Tide: Challenges in Pursuing Health Equity Today.

The term "health equity" has moved from obscurity to the mainstream, creating new possibilities for those who aspire to a world in which everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be healthy. One can now talk explicitly about health equity. The newfound acceptance, however, carries a risk: loss of meaning. Recognizing the need for a common understanding of the core concepts, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has promoted a definition that prioritizes being sufficiently concrete to guide action. Lack of conceptual clarity is, unfortunately, not the only challenge in pursuing health equity. Another challenge is the lack of respect for fundamental ethical and human rights principles-cornerstones of health equity-displayed almost daily by those in positions of power, including the president; this lack of commitment to fundamental values has an insidiously toxic effect because many people assume that presidential views must be legitimate. Yet another challenge is lack of imagination. Pursuing health equity inevitably requires swimming against the tide of prevailing forces that exclude, marginalize, or otherwise disadvantage groups of people based on their skin color, wealth, gender, disabilities, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, or other characteristics tightly linked with social advantage. To persist in swimming against the tide, the end goal and the reason for pursuing it must be very strong and very clear. Academic medicine can play an important role as a powerful force in setting norms and shaping the values and attitudes of medical students, attending physicians, and research faculty.

Retirements of Coal and Oil Power Plants in California: Association With Reduced Preterm Birth Among Populations Nearby.

Coal and oil power plant retirements reduce air pollution nearby, but few studies have leveraged these natural experiments for public health research. We used California Department of Public Health birth records and US Energy Information Administration data from 2001-2011 to evaluate the relationship between the retirements of 8 coal and oil power plants and nearby preterm (gestational age of <37 weeks) birth. We conducted a difference-in-differences analysis using adjusted linear mixed models that included 57,005 births-6.3% of which were preterm-to compare the probability of preterm birth before and after power plant retirement among mothers residing within 0-5 km and 5-10 km of the 8 power plants. We found that power plant retirements were associated with a decrease in the proportion of preterm birth within 5 km (-0.019, 95% CI: -0.031, -0.008) and 5-10 km (-0.015, 95% CI: -0.024, -0.007), controlling for secular trends with mothers living 10-20 km away. For the 0-5-km area, this corresponds to a reduction in preterm birth from 7.0% to 5.1%. Subgroup analyses indicated a potentially larger association among non-Hispanic black and Asian mothers than among non-Hispanic white and Hispanic mothers and no differences in educational attainment. Future coal and oil power plant retirements may reduce preterm birth among nearby populations.

Economic Hardship in Childhood: A Neglected Issue in ACE Studies?

Objectives Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have been linked with ill-health in adulthood, but ACE literature has focused on family disruption or dysfunction (e.g., child abuse, parental separation), with less attention to economic adversity. We examined whether a mother's economic hardship in childhood (EHC) was associated with women's hardships and health-risk behaviors during/just before pregnancy. Methods We analyzed population-based survey data on 27,102 postpartum California women. EHC included respondents' reports that during childhood they/their families experienced hunger because of inability to afford food or moved because of problems paying rent/mortgage and the frequency of difficulty paying for basic needs. We examined six maternal hardships/behaviors during/just before pregnancy, including four hardships (poverty, food insecurity, homelessness/no regular place to sleep, intimate partner violence) and two behaviors (smoking, binge drinking). Prevalence ratios (PRs) were calculated from sequential logistic regression models estimating associations between EHC (categorized by level of hardship) and each maternal hardship/behavior, first without adjustment, then adjusting for other childhood and current maternal factors, and finally adding family disruption/dysfunction. Results Before adjustment for family disruption/dysfunction, the highest and intermediate EHC levels were associated with each maternal hardship/behavior; after full adjustment, those associations persisted except with smoking. Higher EHC levels generally appeared associated with larger PRs, although confidence intervals overlapped. Conclusions for Policy/Practice These findings link childhood economic hardship with women's hardships, binge drinking, and possibly smoking around the time of pregnancy. Without establishing causality, they support previous research indicating that childhood economic adversity should be considered an ACE.

Worry about racial discrimination: A missing piece of the puzzle of Black-White disparities in preterm birth?

OBJECTIVES: The causes of the large and persistent Black-White disparity in preterm birth (PTB) are unknown. It is biologically plausible that chronic stress across a woman's life course could be a contributor. Prior research suggests that chronic worry about experiencing racial discrimination could affect PTB through neuroendocrine, vascular, or immune mechanisms involved in both responses to stress and the initiation of labor. This study aimed to examine the role of chronic worry about racial discrimination in Black-White disparities in PTB. METHODS: The data source was cross-sectional California statewide-representative surveys of 2,201 Black and 8,122 White, non-Latino, U.S.-born postpartum women with singleton live births during 2011-2014. Chronic worry about racial discrimination (chronic worry) was defined as responses of "very often" or "somewhat often" (vs. "not very often" or "never") to the question: "Overall during your life until now, how often have you worried that you might be treated or viewed unfairly because of your race or ethnic group?" Prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated from sequential logistic regression models, before and after adjustment for multiple social/demographic, behavioral, and medical factors, to estimate the magnitude of: (a) PTB risks associated with chronic worry among Black women and among White women; and (b) Black-White disparities in PTB, before and after adjustment for chronic worry. RESULTS: Among Black and White women respectively, 36.9 (95% CI 32.9-40.9) % and 5.5 (95% CI 4.5-6.5) % reported chronic worry about racial discrimination; rates were highest among Black women of higher income and education levels. Chronic worry was significantly associated with PTB among Black women before (PR 1.73, 95% CI 1.12-2.67) and after (PR 2.00, 95% CI 1.33-3.01) adjustment for covariates. The unadjusted Black-White disparity in PTB (PR 1.59, 95%CI 1.21-2.09) appeared attenuated and became non-significant after adjustment for chronic worry (PR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93-1.81); it appeared further attenuated after adding the covariates (PR 1.17, 95% CI 0.85-1.63). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic worry about racial discrimination may play an important role in Black-White disparities in PTB and may help explain the puzzling and repeatedly observed greater PTB disparities among more socioeconomically-advantaged women. Although the single measure of experiences of racial discrimination used in this study precluded examination of the role of other experiences of racial discrimination, such as overt incidents, it is likely that our findings reflect an association between one or more experiences of racial discrimination and PTB. Further research should examine a range of experiences of racial discrimination, including not only chronic worry but other psychological and emotional states and both subtle and overt incidents as well. These dramatic results from a large statewide-representative study add to a growing-but not widely known-literature linking racism-related stress with physical health in general, and shed light on the links between racism-related stress and PTB specifically. Without being causally definitive, this study's findings should stimulate further research and heighten awareness of the potential role of unmeasured social variables, such as diverse experiences of racial discrimination, in racial disparities in health.

Methods to Assess Adverse Childhood Experiences of Children and Families: Toward Approaches to Promote Child Well-being in Policy and Practice.

BACKGROUND: Advances in human development sciences point to tremendous possibilities to promote healthy child development and well-being across life by proactively supporting safe, stable and nurturing family relationships (SSNRs), teaching resilience, and intervening early to promote healing the trauma and stress associated with disruptions in SSNRs. Assessing potential disruptions in SSNRs, such as adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), can contribute to assessing risk for trauma and chronic and toxic stress. Asking about ACEs can help with efforts to prevent and attenuate negative impacts on child development and both child and family well-being. Many methods to assess ACEs exist but have not been compared. The National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH) now measures ACEs for children, but requires further assessment and validation. METHODS: We identified and compared methods to assess ACEs among children and families, evaluated the acceptability and validity of the new NSCH-ACEs measure, and identified implications for assessing ACEs in research and practice. RESULTS: Of 14 ACEs assessment methods identified, 5 have been used in clinical settings (vs public health assessment or research) and all but 1 require self or parent report (3 allow child report). Across methods, 6 to 20 constructs are assessed, 4 of which are common to all: parental incarceration, domestic violence, household mental illness/suicide, household alcohol or substance abuse. Common additional content includes assessing exposure to neighborhood violence, bullying, discrimination, or parental death. All methods use a numeric, cumulative risk scoring methodology. The NSCH-ACEs measure was acceptable to respondents as evidenced by few missing values and no reduction in response rate attributable to asking about children's ACEs. The 9 ACEs assessed in the NSCH co-occur, with most children with 1 ACE having additional ACEs. This measure showed efficiency and confirmatory factor analysis as well as latent class analysis supported a cumulative risk scoring method. Formative as well as reflective measurement models further support cumulative risk scoring and provide evidence of predictive validity of the NSCH-ACEs. Common effects of ACEs across household income groups confirm information distinct from economic status is provided and suggest use of population-wide versus high-risk approaches to assessing ACEs. CONCLUSIONS: Although important variations exist, available ACEs measurement methods are similar and show consistent associations with poorer health outcomes in absence of protective factors and resilience. All methods reviewed appear to coincide with broader goals to facilitate health education, promote health and, where needed, to mitigate the trauma, chronic stress, and behavioral and emotional sequelae that can arise with exposure to ACEs. Assessing ACEs appears acceptable to individuals and families when conducted in population-based and clinical research contexts. Although research to date and neurobiological findings compel early identification and health education about ACEs in clinical settings, further research to guide use in pediatric practice is required, especially as it relates to distinguishing ACEs assessment from identifying current family psychosocial risks and child abuse. The reflective as well as formative psychometric analyses conducted in this study confirm use of cumulative risk scoring for the NSCH-ACEs measure. Even if children have not been exposed to ACEs, assessing ACEs has value as an educational tool for engaging and educating families and children about the importance of SSNRs and how to recognize and manage stress and learn resilience.

Are the poverty histories of neighbourhoods associated with psychosocial well-being among a representative sample of California mothers? An observational study.

BACKGROUND: We examine the association between the poverty histories of neighbourhoods and three indicators of psychosocial well-being-depressive symptoms, sense of control and number of stressors-in an observational study of mothers of young children in California. We also consider if length of residence in a neighbourhood moderates the association between neighbourhood poverty history and psychosocial well-being. METHODS: Data come from the Geographic Research on Well-being (GROW) Study, a subsample of mothers who completed the population-based California Maternal and Infant Health Assessment in 2003-2007 and were reinterviewed in 2012-2013. Poverty histories of neighbourhoods were constructed using the Neighbourhood Change Database (1970-2000) and American Community Survey (2005-2009). The analytic sample included 2726 women from GROW residing in 1906 census tracts. RESULTS: Adjusting for individual socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, women living in neighbourhoods where poverty decreased over the 40-year period had lower odds of depressive symptoms and a greater sense of control than women living in long-term, low-poverty neighbourhoods. Women living in long-term high-poverty neighbourhoods or in neighbourhoods where poverty increased over the 40-year period reported lower sense of control than women living in long-term, low-poverty neighbourhoods and these effects were modified by length of time living in the neighbourhood. No significant effects of neighbourhood poverty histories were found for number of stressors. CONCLUSIONS: Policies aimed at reducing neighbourhood poverty may improve mothers' psychosocial well-being.

Latina Birth Outcomes in California: Not so Paradoxical.

Objectives To investigate Latina-White differences in birth outcomes in California from 2003 to 2010, looking for evidence of the often-cited "Latina paradox" and assessing the possible role of socioeconomic factors in observed differences. MethodsUsing statewide-representative data from the California Maternal and Infant Health Assessment, an annual population-based postpartum survey, we compared rates of preterm birth (PTB) and low birth weight (LBW) in five groups: U.S.-born non-Latina Whites ("Whites"), U.S.-born Mexican-Americans, U.S.-born non-Mexican Latinas, Mexican immigrants, and non-Mexican Latina immigrants. Logistic regression models examined the relative likelihood of PTB and LBW for women in each Latina subgroup compared with Whites, before and after adjustment for socioeconomic and other covariates. Results In unadjusted analyses, women in each Latina subgroup appeared more likely than White women to have PTB and LBW, although the increased likelihood of LBW among Mexican immigrants was statistically non-significant. After adjustment for less favorable socioeconomic characteristics among Latinas compared with Whites, observed differences in the estimated likelihoods of PTB or LBW for Latina subgroups relative to Whites were attenuated and (with the exception of PTB among U.S.-born Mexican Americans) no longer statistically significant. Conclusions We found no evidence of a "Latina paradox" in birth outcomes, which some have cited as evidence that social disadvantage is not always health-damaging. As observed in several previous studies, our findings were non-paradoxical: consistent with their socioeconomic disadvantage, Latinas had worse birth outcomes than non-Latina White women. Policy-makers should not rely on a "Latina paradox" to ensure good birth outcomes among socioeconomically disadvantaged Latina women.