IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1996866837-843_0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adverse pregnancy outcomes: Differences between US- and foreign-born women in major US racial and ethnic groups

Author

Listed:
  • Singh, G.K.
  • Stella, M.Yu.

Abstract

Objectives. This study examined whether there were significant differentials between US-born and foreign-born women in risks of infant mortality, low birthweight, and preterm birth and whether these differentials, if they existed, varied across major US racial/ethnic groups. Methods. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to national linked birth/infant death records for 1985 through 1987 to estimate overall and ethnic-specific maternal nativity effects on pregnancy outcomes. Results. Substantial maternal nativity differences in risks of infant mortality and low birthweight were found, with the magnitude of the nativity effect varying significantly across racial/ethnic groups. Overall, foreign-born status was associated with 7% and 20% lower risks of low birthweight and infant mortality, respectively. However, the reduced risk of adverse pregnancy outcome associated with immigrant status tended to be substantially larger for Blacks, Cubans, Mexicans, and Chinese than for other ethnic groups. Conclusions. Maternal nativity status, along with ethnicity, may serve as an important axis of differentiation in birth outcome studies. Further research needs to be conducted to assess the effects of behavioral, cultural, and psychosocial factors in explaining the nativity differentials observed here.

Suggested Citation

  • Singh, G.K. & Stella, M.Yu., 1996. "Adverse pregnancy outcomes: Differences between US- and foreign-born women in major US racial and ethnic groups," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 86(6), pages 837-843.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1996:86:6:837-843_0
    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:1996:86:6:837-843_0. 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.