Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Maternal educational inequalities about adverse pregnancy outcomes observed in a rural area of a province of China during a time period (2010–2018)
  1. Lixin Li1,
  2. Yanpeng Wu2,
  3. Yao Yang3,
  4. Ying Wu1,
  5. Yan Zhuang1,
  6. Dingyun You4
  1. 1 School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
  2. 2 Shanghai Institute of Infectious Disease and Biosecurity, School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
  3. 3 School of Public Health, Kunming, China
  4. 4 School of Public Health, Kunming Medical University, NHC Key Laboratory of Periconception Health Birth in Western China, Kunming, China
  1. Correspondence to Professor Dingyun You, School of Public Health, Kunming Medical University, NHC Key Laboratory of Periconception Health Birth in Western China, Kunming 650500, China; youdingyun{at}163.com; Professor Yan Zhuang, School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China; zhuangy179{at}126.com

Abstract

Background The relationship between maternal education and adverse pregnancy outcomes is well documented. However, limited research has investigated maternal educational disparities in adverse pregnancy outcomes in China. This study examined maternal educational inequalities associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in rural China.

Methods We conducted a population-based cohort study using participants enrolled in the National Free Preconception Health Examination Project in Yunnan province from 2010 to 2018. The primary outcome was stillbirth, and the secondary outcome was adverse pregnancy outcomes, defined as a composite event of stillbirth, preterm birth or low birth weight. The study was restricted to singleton births at 20–42 weeks’ gestation. Univariate and multivariate log-binomial regression models were performed to estimate crude risk ratios (RRs) and confounding-adjusted RRs (ARRs) for stillbirth and adverse pregnancy outcomes according to maternal education level.

Results A total of 197 722 singleton births were included in the study. Compared with mid-educated women, low-educated women were at a significantly increased risk of stillbirth (ARR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.38) and adverse pregnancy outcomes (ARR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.16). However, the risk of stillbirth (ARR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.35) was significantly higher for high-educated women compared with mid-educated women.

Conclusion Compared with women with medium education level, women with lower education level were more likely to experience adverse pregnancy outcomes, including stillbirth, and women with higher education level were more likely to experience stillbirth.

  • pregnancy
  • education
  • infant
  • newborn

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Not applicable.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Not applicable.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • LL and YW contributed equally.

  • Contributors LL, YW (Yanpeng Wu), YW (Ying Wu) and DY were involved in study conception. YY and DY were involved in data curation. YY and DY obtained funding. LL, YW (Yanpeng Wu) and YW (Ying Wu) were involved in investigation and methodology design. LL completed statistical analysis. YW (Ying Wu), YZ and DY were involved in project administration. LL, YW (Yanpeng Wu) and YW (Ying Wu) were responsible for manuscript preparation and revision. LL and YW (Yanpeng Wu) were responsible for the overall content as the guarantor. All authors provided critical feedback on manuscript drafts and approved the final manuscript to be published.

  • Funding This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 81872710, 82073569, 81960592), Foundation of Yunnan Educational Committee (2016ZZX088) and Joint applied Basic Research Programmes of Science and Technology Commission Foundation of Yunnan Province and Kunming Medical University (2017FE468-21).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.