Acculturation and acculturative stress are potential risk factors for adverse perinatal outcomes. This study investigates whether and how acculturative stress affects preterm birth (PTB) in a sample of migrant women in Berlin. We interviewed 955 women who recently gave birth using standardized questionnaires (Frankfurt Acculturation Scale and Acculturative Stress Index). Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed the effects of acculturation and acculturative stress on PTB. Women with migrant backgrounds did not have significantly higher PTB rates than German natives. First-generation migrants experienced higher acculturative stress levels than second-generation migrants, 38.8% vs. 13.2%. Acculturative stress could not be identified as a risk factor for PTB in our sample. These results need to be considered in the context of an international city and the wide use of antenatal care services in our population, which could be responsible for similarly good perinatal outcomes and highlights the potential of good access to perinatal care for vulnerable groups.
Background and Aims Estimating prevalence and incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) based on claims data often underlies bias and limitations due to uncertainty of diagnostic validity. We investigated CKD prevalence and incidence over time using data from a community-dwelling cohort of individuals aged 70+ linked to individual claims data. We assessed the diagnostic validity of the claims-based compared with the eGFR-based CKD definition. Method We assessed CKD prevalence and incidence in two data sources: 1) eGFR values of participants aged 70+ (n = 2,069) of the Berlin Initiative Study (BIS), including five biennial study visits from 2009-2019, and 2) claims data of BIS participants matched on person-level. Using eGFR, we defined CKD prevalence as eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73m² calculated with the creatinine-based CKD-EPI (2009) equation. For each study visit, prevalent CKD cases were considered as incident if eGFR was ≥60 ml/min/1.73m² in the respective previous study visit. In claims data, in- and outpatient ICD-10 diagnoses (N18.3, N18.4, N18.5, N18.8, N18.9, N19) in the year preceding and/or following the study visit date were used to determine CKD prevalence. Incidence was defined as prevalent cases without a diagnosis in the year preceding the first CKD diagnosis. The denominator for incidence was defined as all persons at risk, i.e., who were not prevalent in a respective previous study visit and still under observation. We assessed the diagnostic validity of claims-based CKD prevalence and incidence using eGFR data as a reference. Analyses were stratified by sex. Results Between 2009 and 2019, CKD prevalence increased from 0.42 to 0.51 based on eGFR and from 0.30 to 0.43 based on claims data. Incidence varied between 0.16–0.22 using eGFR and 0.07–0.13 using BIS claims data. There was no clear time trend for incidence in any data source. Diagnostic validity of claims-based CKD prevalence and incidence detection is displayed in Table 1. Sensitivity for prevalence increased while other indicators remained stable over time. Detection of incident cases showed lower sensitivity (0.18–0.30 vs. 0.58–0.70) and PPVs (0.40–0.60 vs. 0.79–0.83) compared to prevalence, respectively. Prevalence and incidence based on claims data were slightly higher in males compared to females (Figure 1). Conclusion Using the eGFR-based or claims-based definition of CKD we found an increase in prevalence between 2009 and 2019. This might be due to the introduction of the KDIGO guidelines in 2012. During the same time, CKD incidence rates were stable. Comparing the claims-based with eGFR-based CKD definition, we found a sensitivity of 0.58-0.70 for prevalence and 0.18-0.30 for incidence, indicating that there is a risk of underdetection of CKD when using solely claims data, in particular for incident cases.
Purpose To identify disease-specific profiles comprising patient characteristics and imaging biomarkers on contrast-enhanced (CE)-computed tomography (CT) that enable the non-invasive prediction of the hepatopulmonary shunt fraction (HPSF) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) before resin-based transarterial radioembolization (TARE). Patients and Methods This institutional review board-approved (EA2/071/19) retrospective study included 56 patients with HCC recommended for TARE. All patients received tri-phasic CE-CT within 6 weeks prior to an angiographic TARE evaluation study using technetium-99m macroaggregated albumin. Imaging biomarkers representative of tumor extent, morphology, and perfusion, as well as disease-specific clinical parameters, were used to perform data-driven variable selection with backward elimination to generate multivariable linear regression models predictive of HPSF. Results were used to create clinically applicable risk scores for patients scheduled for TARE. Additionally, Cox regression was used to identify independent risk factors for poor overall survival (OS). Results Mean HPSF was 13.11% ± 7.6% (range: 2.8– 35.97%). Index tumor diameter (p = 0.014) or volume (p = 0.034) in combination with index tumor non-rim arterial phase enhancement (APHE) (p < 0.001) and washout (p < 0.001) were identified as significant non-invasive predictors of HPSF on CE-CT. Specifically, the prediction models revealed that the HPSF increased with index lesion diameter or volume and showed higher HPSF if non-rim APHE was present. In contrast, index tumor washout was associated with decreased HPSF levels. Independent risk factors of poorer OS were radiogenomic venous invasion and ascites at baseline. Conclusion The featured prediction models can be used for the initial non-invasive estimation of HPSF in patients with HCC before TARE to assist in clinical treatment evaluation while potentially sparing ineligible patients from the angiographic shunt evaluation study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.