Keirse M J
Lancet. 1984 May 26;1(8387):1166-9. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)91405-3.
Three cases of perinatal death, of which two needed to be included in and one excluded from national perinatal mortality statistics, were presented to 1004 specialist and trainee obstetricians in northern Belgium (ie, Flanders) and the Netherlands. Of the respondents (52%), 69% admitted that they would report none of the cases and 13% would report all of them. Overreporting occurred twice as often and underreporting ten times as often as correct reporting--only 6% would apply the current regulations for registration of perinatal mortality correctly in all three cases. Although the statutory regulations with regard to the cases were similar in the two countries, there were differences between Belgian and Dutch doctors in their reporting of these three cases. This indicates that Belgian and Dutch perinatal mortality statistics do not measure the same thing and that neither contains what it purports to contain. The findings cast doubts on the validity of using national perinatal mortality figures as indicators of perinatal health or perinatal care in and between European countries.
向比利时北部(即弗拉芒地区)和荷兰的1004名专科和实习产科医生介绍了三例围产期死亡病例,其中两例需要纳入、一例需要排除在国家围产期死亡率统计数据之外。在受访者(52%)中,69%承认他们不会报告任何病例,13%会报告所有病例。过度报告的发生率是正确报告的两倍,漏报的发生率是正确报告的十倍——只有6%的人会在所有三例病例中正确应用围产期死亡率的现行登记规定。尽管两国关于这些病例的法定规定相似,但比利时和荷兰医生在报告这三例病例时存在差异。这表明比利时和荷兰的围产期死亡率统计数据衡量的不是同一件事,而且两者都没有包含其声称包含的内容。这些发现让人怀疑将国家围产期死亡率数字用作欧洲国家内部和之间围产期健康或围产期护理指标的有效性。