IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/19978781323-1327_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality assessment of fetal death records in Georgia: A method for improvement

Author

Listed:
  • Gaudino Jr., J.A.
  • Blackmore-Prince, C.
  • Yip, R.
  • Rochat, R.W.

Abstract

Objectives. Although more fetal deaths than neonatal deaths occur, routinely collected fetal death data are seldom used for perinatal epidemiologic research because of data quality concerns. We developed a strategy for identifying and correcting errors in birthweight and gestational age in fetal death records. Methods. Using data from Georgia for 1989 and 1990, we detected singleton fetal death records having improbable or missing birthweight or gestational age by comparing these values with referent values. To verify the questionable values, we contacted 100 reporting hospitals in 1992. Results. In 817 of 2226 records, values were either improbable (60.1%) or missing (39.9%). We were able to contact the hospitals to verify data for 716 (88%) of these records. Verification resulted in corrections to 405 (57%) records, and 48% of unreported birthweights were obtained. Conclusions. Many errors in recorded gestational age and birthweight were identified by this method. Rather than deleting or imputing problem data for analyses, researchers should consider efforts to verify them. Efforts to improve this information should include improve reporting, strict quality assurance, and procedures for routine verification and correction of records.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaudino Jr., J.A. & Blackmore-Prince, C. & Yip, R. & Rochat, R.W., 1997. "Quality assessment of fetal death records in Georgia: A method for improvement," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 87(8), pages 1323-1327.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1997:87:8:1323-1327_8
    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:1997:87:8:1323-1327_8. 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.