Suppr超能文献

利用死亡证明来描述婴儿猝死综合征(SIDS):机会与局限性。

Using death certificates to characterize sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS): opportunities and limitations.

机构信息

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Reproductive Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.

出版信息

J Pediatr. 2010 Jan;156(1):38-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.07.017.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To examine cause-of-death terminology written on death certificates for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and to determine the adequacy of this text data in more fully describing circumstances potentially contributing to SIDS deaths.

STUDY DESIGN

With 2003 and 2004 US mortality files, we analyzed all deaths that were assigned the underlying cause-of-death code for SIDS (R95). With the terminology written on the death certificates, we grouped cases into SIDS-related cause-of-death subcategories and then assessed the percentage of cases in each subcategory with contributory or possibly causal factors described on the certificate.

RESULTS

Of the 4408 SIDS-coded deaths, we subcategorized 67.2% as "SIDS" and 11.0% as "sudden unexplained (or unexpected) infant death." The terms "probable SIDS" (2.8%) and "consistent with SIDS" (4.6%) were found less frequently. Of those death certificates that described additional factors, "bedsharing or unsafe sleep environment" was mentioned approximately 80% of the time. Most records (79.4%) did not mention any additional factors.

CONCLUSION

Our death certificate analysis of the cause-of-death terminology provided a unique opportunity to more accurately characterize SIDS-coded deaths. However, the death certificate was still limited in its ability to more fully describe the circumstances leading to SIDS death, indicating the need for a more comprehensive source of SIDS data, such as a case registry.

摘要

目的

检查死亡证明上关于婴儿猝死综合征 (SIDS) 的死因术语,并确定这些文本数据在更全面地描述可能导致 SIDS 死亡的情况方面的充分性。

研究设计

我们使用 2003 年和 2004 年的美国死亡率档案,分析了所有被分配为 SIDS(R95)根本死因代码的死亡病例。根据死亡证明上的术语,我们将病例分为与 SIDS 相关的死因亚类,然后评估每个亚类中描述有促成或可能导致 SIDS 死亡的因素的病例百分比。

结果

在 4408 例 SIDS 编码死亡中,我们将 67.2%归类为“SIDS”,11.0%归类为“突发不明原因(或意外)婴儿死亡”。“可能的 SIDS”(2.8%)和“符合 SIDS”(4.6%)的术语较少出现。在那些描述了其他因素的死亡证明中,“与床同睡或不安全的睡眠环境”约有 80%的时间被提及。大多数记录(79.4%)没有提到任何其他因素。

结论

我们对死因术语的死亡证明分析为更准确地描述 SIDS 编码死亡提供了一个独特的机会。然而,死亡证明在更全面地描述导致 SIDS 死亡的情况方面仍然存在局限性,这表明需要更全面的 SIDS 数据来源,例如病例登记处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验