Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Mar-Apr;126(2):186-94.
doi: 10.1177/003335491112600209.

Sensitivity of birth certificate reports of birth defects in Atlanta, 1995-2005: effects of maternal, infant, and hospital characteristics

Sheree L Boulet  1 , Mikyong Shin, Russell S Kirby, David Goodman, Adolfo Correa
Affiliations

Sensitivity of birth certificate reports of birth defects in Atlanta, 1995-2005: effects of maternal, infant, and hospital characteristics

Sheree L Boulet et al. Public Health Rep. 2011 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

Objectives: We assessed variations in the sensitivity of birth defect diagnoses derived from birth certificate data by maternal, infant, and hospital characteristics.

Methods: We compared birth certificate data for 1995-2005 births in Atlanta with data from the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program (MACDP). We calculated the sensitivity of birth certificates for reporting defects often discernable at birth (e.g., anencephaly, spina bifida, cleft lip, clubfoot, Down syndrome, and rectal atresia or stenosis). We used multivariable logistic regression models to examine associations with sociodemographic and hospital factors.

Results: The overall sensitivity of birth certificates was 23% and ranged from 7% for rectal atresia/stenosis to 69% for anencephaly. Non-Hispanic black maternal race/ethnicity, less than a high school education, and preterm birth were independently associated with a lower probability of a birth defect diagnosis being reported on a birth certificate. Sensitivity also was lower for hospitals with > 1,000 births per year.

Conclusions: The underreporting of birth defects on birth certificates is influenced by sociodemographic and hospital characteristics. Interpretation of birth defects prevalence estimates derived from birth certificate reports should take these issues into account.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure.
Figure.
Three-year simple moving mean of prevalence of selected birth defects identifiable at birth by race/ethnicity for birth certificate and MACDP data, Atlanta, 1995–2005
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Freedman MA, Gay GA, Brockert JE, Potrzebowski PW, Rothwell CJ. The 1989 revisions of the US Standard Certificates of Live Birth and Death and the US Standard Report of Fetal Death. Am J Public Health. 1988;78:168–72. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hexter AC, Harris JA, Roeper P, Croen LA, Krueger P, Gant D. Evaluation of the hospital discharge diagnoses index and the birth certificate as sources of information on birth defects. Public Health Rep. 1990;105:296–307. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mackeprang M, Hay S, Lunde AS. Completeness and accuracy of reporting of malformations on birth certificates. HSMHA Health Rep. 1972;87:43–9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Frost F, Starzyk P, George S, McLaughlin JF. Birth complication reporting: the effect of birth certificate design. Am J Public Health. 1984;74:505–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Piper JM, Mitchel EF, Jr, Snowden M, Hall C, Adams M, Taylor P. Validation of 1989 Tennessee birth certificates using maternal and newborn hospital records. Am J Epidemiol. 1993;137:758–68. - PubMed