ライフサイエンスコーパス: birth certificate

1 ntrols were hospital-matched and selected by birth certificate.

2 previous cesarean were so designated on the birth certificate.

3 and ethnic ancestry were identified from the birth certificate.

4 year of life at the address indicated on the birth certificate.

5 controlling for confounders available on the birth certificate.

6 ty drug use check boxes on the Massachusetts birth certificate.

7 se, 1,728 (88%) were matched to a California birth certificate.

8 s first year of life were also linked to the birth certificate.

9 ociodemographic variables were gathered from birth certificates.

10 essee, and had complete information on their birth certificates.

11 ia Cancer Registry and matched to California birth certificates.

12 population (GP) controls (n=418) from state birth certificates.

13 ertificates, and controls were selected from birth certificates.

14 Services and linked to 1995-2006 California birth certificates.

15 ased on medical and pharmacy claims data and birth certificates.

16 al records with a birth defects registry and birth certificates.

17 Infants were identified from birth certificates.

18 h parental ages and covariates obtained from birth certificates.

19 nters that selected controls from electronic birth certificates.

20 ncies, and birth outcomes were obtained from birth certificates.

21 ession to analyze 1968-1985 data from 11,798 birth certificates.

22 ernal risk factors were gathered from 95,711 birth certificates (1994-1996).

23 The mother's address from the birth certificate and addresses reported from a resident

24 ntrol study using 1992-1998 Washington State birth certificate and hospital discharge records to inve

25 None of the differences between birth certificate and ideal controls was significant, wh

26 except birth weight, the differences between birth certificate and ideal controls were smaller than t

27 her-infant dyads were identified from linked birth certificate and maternal and infant hospital claim

28 her-infant dyads were identified from linked birth certificate and maternal and newborn hospital clai

29 Agreement between the birth certificate and maternal report was good for singl

30 267,213 children aged 12-15 years with both birth certificate and school records.

31 were linked with maternal health data using birth certificates and EHRs to determine prenatal medica

32 certainment ranged from 70.6% to 82.0% using birth certificates and from 86.2% to 90.3% using confide

33 orbidity diagnoses were obtained from linked birth certificates and hospitalization files.

34 For each case, we recruited 3 controls from birth certificates and interviewed identified adult clos

35 ntrol individuals were randomly sampled from birth certificates and matched 2:1 to cases by sex, birt

36 Data were collected from birth certificates and maternally linked hospital discha

37 ness of ascertainment of prenatal smoking on birth certificates and on confidential questionnaires in

38 Both birth certificates and questionnaires underestimated the

39 and 2001, were retrospectively obtained from birth certificates and were linked to their clinical, la

40 f of the world's newborn babies do not get a birth certificate, and most neonatal deaths and almost a

41 Used linked ART surveillance, birth certificates, and birth defects registry data for

42 were had their records linked to California birth certificates, and controls were selected from birt

43 The authors concluded that birth certificates are an efficient means of locating ch

44 ence were correctly designated on the second birth certificate as a VBAC; 79.3% of women with a V- CS

45 g status (breast vs bottle) was coded on the birth certificate as the type of feeding the infant was

46 Birth certificate (BC) controls are an alternative, beca

47 defects (control infants) were selected from birth certificates by stratified random sampling.

48 onnaires was validated with information from birth certificates (cases, n = 378; controls, n = 283).

49 etric estimate) revisions of the US standard birth certificate: clinical or obstetric estimate and LM

50 In all six states, the birth certificates' completeness of ascertainment varied

51 From 1980 through 1988, birth certificates contained a check box indicating a pr

52 eukemia (ALL) cases 0-7 years of age and 214 birth certificate controls matched on date of birth, sex

53 ad been diagnosed with incident leukemia and birth certificate controls who were matched to them on a

54 w participation rate (49.0% for 560 enrolled birth certificate controls), using birth records to recr

55 end controls may be less representative than birth certificate controls.

56 Crude and birth certificate covariate-adjusted results for carbon

57 The Medical Birth Registry of Norway has birth certificate data dating back to 1967 and allowed n

58 ch consists of linked hospital discharge and birth certificate data for 580,282 deliveries.

59 National study of birth certificate data for live births to women in 45 US

60 Birth certificate data frequently are used to monitor th

61 Using 1999-2001 birth certificate data from 2 counties in North Carolina

62 eks of gestation during 2000-2005 using live birth certificate data from three states (Pennsylvania,

63 mined hospital discharge diagnoses linked to birth certificate data in the year following delivery fo

64 Birth certificate data linked to infant death certificat

65 nited States, researchers compared 1997-2003 birth certificate data linked to selected controls (n =

66 This study compared birth certificate data on the amount, timing, and adequa

67 udy using linked New York City discharge and birth certificate data sets from 2010.

68 hildren, identified using publicly available birth certificate data, born in 1992, 1994, 1996, and 19

69 regnancy characteristics were extracted from birth certificate data.

70 ntified through linking of annual California birth certificate data.

71 uri Department of Health's maternally-linked birth certificate database, we performed a retrospective

72 four sources: hospital discharge diagnoses, birth certificates, death certificates, and a study of n

73 The birth prevalence of NTDs reported on birth certificates decreased from 37.8 per 100 000 live

74 cancer diagnosis was randomly selected from birth certificate files (n = 12990) with frequency match

75 r 2013; CCR records were linked to statewide birth certificate files from January 2000 to December 20

76 Florida resident birth certificates for 2004-2006 were linked to the Cent

77 Data were derived from maternally linked birth certificates for 6,325 African-American women whos

78 ntrols collected by random digit dialing and birth certificates for a Children's Oncology Group case-

79 The authors used linked Georgia birth certificates for first and second deliveries to ex

80 k State Congenital Malformations Registry to birth certificates for the years 1992-2006.

81 Sixty-four birth certificate-friend control pairs were enrolled (n

82 trols were identified using Washington State birth certificates from 1984-1998.

83 We analyzed Florida birth certificates from 1994 to 2002 linked to Florida p

84 d fee-for-service billing records matched to birth certificates from Medicaid beneficiaries aged 0 to

85 From live birth certificates from three states, we constructed a c

86 hone interviews with 399 women whose child's birth certificate had at least one of the boxes checked

87 e proportion of children aged 0-4 years with birth certificates had increased by 1.5% (95% CI -7.1 to

88 of gestational age measurements derived from birth certificates has been in question.

89 Previous studies of birth certificates have not fully evaluated how accurate

90 dren between the ages of 3 and 5 years, with birth certificates, height and weight measures, and info

91 We linked birth certificates, hospital discharge abstracts (includ

92 1,213) whose birth weight was collected from birth certificates in 1991.

93 1,186) whose birth weight was collected from birth certificates in 1991.

94 al Perinatal Data System combines electronic birth certificate information with questions asked of al

95 Using birth certificate information, we examined the relation

96 to December 31, 2009, using Washington State birth certificates linked to hospital discharge data.

97 rm birth using 2008-2010 New York City (NYC) birth certificates linked to hospital records.

98 Two control birth certificates, matched on date of birth and sex, we

99 Follow-up, which collected information from birth certificates, medical records, and mothers of a na

100 Data were from parental interviews, birth certificates, multiple-pass 24-h dietary recalls,

101 98-2007) who could be linked to a California birth certificate (n = 3,590).

102 There was no access to birth certificates, obstetric or pediatric medical recor

103 r gestational age by analyzing data from the birth certificates of 173,205 singleton infants born ali

104 ory, and birth weight were obtained from the birth certificates of all 320 subjects.

105 HCV data were matched with 2011-2013 birth certificates of children aged >/=20 months to iden

106 amination Survey (NHANES III) were linked to birth certificates of US-born infants and children.

107 rically based variables collected on Georgia birth certificates: outcome of preceding pregnancy, hist

108 tion of children younger than 5 years with a birth certificate, proportion younger than 5 years with

109 and were drawn from the New York State live birth certificate registry.

110 alence ratios (PRs) of maternal smoking from birth certificate report and ASDs using logistic regress

111 Birth certificate reports of spina bifida and anencephal

112 Regardless of birth certificate revision, the median, 10th, and 90th p

113 irths and lower for postterm births for both birth certificate revisions.

114 nd 2013 using data from newly revised Oregon birth certificates that allowed for the disaggregation o

115 From the immediate birth certificates, the delivery method for each of the

116 rs, r = 0.84) was highly correlated with the birth certificates, there was differential measurement e

117 ecause of underreporting of amniocentesis on birth certificates, these data support an association be

118 Information was obtained from the infant's birth certificate to assess the relation between seizure

119 The authors used 1994 US singleton livebirth birth certificates to compare Mexican Americans with non

120 of Developmental Services records with state birth certificates to identify all siblings and half sib

121 ces records, which were then linked to state birth certificates to identify full sibs and half-sibs a

122 Birth-certificate variables were reviewed in both bivari

123 he 579 women with available information, the birth certificate was fully concordant with respect to i

124 Information available on birth certificates was not sufficient to understand this

125 In this population-based study, California birth certificates were identified for 508 (86%) neurobl

126 Birth certificates were used to select women who had vag

127 ge (1981-1992), obtained from New York State birth certificates, were compared between lead-exposed a

128 ntial reporting by birth weights recorded on birth certificates would result in an overestimated asso