IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/19958581087-1091_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relationship between physicians' qualifications and experience and the adequacy of prenatal care and low birthweight

Author

Listed:
  • Haas, J.S.
  • Orav, E.J.
  • Goldman, L.

Abstract

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between physicians' qualifications and experience and rates of completion of the recommended number of prenatal visits and delivery of a low-birthweight infant. Methods. All deliveries performed by a permanently licensed physician in Massachusetts in 1990 (n = 80 537) were examined. Qualification was measured by board certification. Experience was measured by both volume of deliveries and duration of practice. Results. Women cared for by a non- board-certified physician were less likely to receive the recommended number of prenatal visits (odds ratio [OR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54, 0.85) and were more likely to have a low-birthweight infant (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.00, 1.42). Physicians with a smaller volume of deliveries or a shorter duration of practice were more likely to deliver a low-birthweight infant. Conclusions. The data show an association of board certification with rates of the recommended number of prenatal visits and low birthweight. In addition, volume and duration of practice were significantly associated with low birthweight. Further research should examine whether these associations are related to differences in patient referral or to physicians' judgment and efficiency in provision of prenatal care.

Suggested Citation

  • Haas, J.S. & Orav, E.J. & Goldman, L., 1995. "The relationship between physicians' qualifications and experience and the adequacy of prenatal care and low birthweight," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(8), pages 1087-1091.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1995:85:8:1087-1091_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1995:85:8:1087-1091_9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.