Stillbirths and neonatal mortality as outcomes. Issue 3 (4th September 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Goldenberg, Robert L.; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Jobe, Alan H.; Kamath‐Rayne, Beena D.; Gravette, Michael G.; Rubens, Craig E.
• Is Part Of: International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics. Volume 123:Issue 3(2013)
• Page Start: 252
• Page End: 253
• Publication Date: 2013-09-04
• Subjects: Perinatal mortality -- Resuscitation -- Stillbirth; Gynecology -- Periodicals; Obstetrics -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 618
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.06.020
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-7292

Abstract

Abstract: Several recent studies in low‐resource countries have claimed that training in—and increased use of—newborn resuscitation resulted in reduced stillbirth rates. In the present article, we explore the ability of various types of birth attendant in some low‐resource country locations to gather data that accurately differentiate a stillbirth from a live birth/early neonatal death. We conclude that, in many situations, it cannot be determined whether the infant was a stillbirth or a live birth/early neonatal death, and therefore the least‐biased description of study outcomes includes a combined stillbirth and live birth/neonatal death outcome. However, because defining the burden of stillbirth and neonatal death is important from a public health perspective, every effort should be made, in low‐income countries and elsewhere, to distinguish between stillbirths and live births/neonatal deaths and to report the results independently.