2014
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-214
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pregnancy, prison and perinatal outcomes in New South Wales, Australia: a retrospective cohort study using linked health data

Abstract: BackgroundStudies from the United States and the United Kingdom have found that imprisoned women are less likely to experience poorer maternal and perinatal outcomes than other disadvantaged women. This population-based study used both community controls and women with a history of incarceration as a control group, to investigate whether imprisoned pregnant women in New South Wales, Australia, have improved maternal and perinatal outcomes.MethodsRetrospective cohort study using probabilistic record linkage of … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

4
26
0
4

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
4
26
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…While we were unable to calculate rates for women imprisoned during pregnancy separately, the international literature on the birth outcomes of women imprisoned during pregnancy has found improved birth outcomes, including birth weight, for women imprisoned during pregnancy compared to women imprisoned at other times and worse birth outcomes compared to women who are never imprisoned (Knight, & Plugge, 2005 ). However, these findings were not replicated by the only Australian study to date by Walker, Hilder, Levy, and Sullivan ( 2014 ), which found similarly poor birth outcomes for women imprisoned while pregnant compared to women imprisoned at other times. The authors questioned whether this was in part due to the shorter imprisonment terms within the New South Wales female prison population compared to those in the United States (Walker et al, 2014 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…While we were unable to calculate rates for women imprisoned during pregnancy separately, the international literature on the birth outcomes of women imprisoned during pregnancy has found improved birth outcomes, including birth weight, for women imprisoned during pregnancy compared to women imprisoned at other times and worse birth outcomes compared to women who are never imprisoned (Knight, & Plugge, 2005 ). However, these findings were not replicated by the only Australian study to date by Walker, Hilder, Levy, and Sullivan ( 2014 ), which found similarly poor birth outcomes for women imprisoned while pregnant compared to women imprisoned at other times. The authors questioned whether this was in part due to the shorter imprisonment terms within the New South Wales female prison population compared to those in the United States (Walker et al, 2014 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…The MAGIC study produced the first population data from Australia to enable study of the effect of incarceration on pregnancy outcomes [ 1 ]. Studies that seek to assess the effect of prison on pregnancy among incarcerated women are relatively sparse because of the difficulties in case finding, the challenges of selecting appropriate comparison groups and the extensive data required to control for socio-economic confounders [ 2 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Mothers and Gestation in Custody (MAGIC) cohort study was set up to assess incarceration effects on pregnancy outcomes [ 1 ]. The study used linked records to identify women pregnant while in prison and overcome the lack of pregnancy outcome data for prisoners in the state of New South Wales (NSW), Australia.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Particularly on maternal and infant health, where administrative linked data can increase the availability of information on maternal health, social, and economic trajectories before and during pregnancy 3 . The use of linked high-quality administrative datasets provides a unique opportunity to examine factors that might result in long-term and rare child and maternal outcomes over time, with the additional advantage of using large samples, little loss to follow-up, high level of external validity and a great deal of applicability for policymaking [4][5][6] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%