Sociodemographic and regional differences in neonatal and infant mortality in Switzerland: The Swiss National Cohort

SummaryBackgroundDespite a well-funded healthcare system with universal insurance coverage, Switzerland has one of the highest neonatal and infant mortality rates among high-income countries. Identifying avoidable risk factors targeted by evidence-based policies is a public health priority. We describe neonatal and infant mortality in Switzerland from 2011–2018 and explore associations with neonatal and pregnancy-related variables, parental sociodemographic information, regional factors, and socioeconomic position (SEP) using data from a long-term nation-wide cohort study.MethodsWe included 680,077 live births—representing 99.3% of all infants born in Switzerland between January 2011 and December 2018. We deterministically linked the national live birth register with the mortality register and with census and survey data to create a longitudinal dataset of neonatal and pregnancy-related variables; parental sociodemographic information, such as civil status, age, religion, education, nationality; regional factors, such as urbanity, language region; and the Swiss neighbourhood index of SEP (Swiss-SEP index). Information on maternal education was available for a random subset of 242,949 infants. We investigated associations with neonatal and infant mortality by fitting multivariable Poisson regression models with robust standard errors. Several sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of our findings.ResultsOverall, neonatal mortality rates between 2011 and 2018 were 3.0 per 1000 live births, varying regionally from 3.2 in German-speaking to 2.4 in French-speaking and 2.1 in Italian-speaking Switzerland. For infant mortality, respective rates were 3.7 per 1000 live births overall, varying from 3.9 to 3.3 and 2.9. Adjusting for sex, maternal age, multiple birth and birth rank, neonatal mortality remained significantly associated with language region [rate ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64–0.80 for French-speaking and RR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.51–0.87 for Italian-speaking region], with marital status (RR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.40–1.71 for unmarried), nationality (RR 1.40, 95% CI: 1.21–1.62 for non-European Economic Area vs. Swiss), and the Swiss-SEP index (RR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.00–1.36 for lowest vs. highest SEP quintile). In the subset, we showed a possible association of neonatal mortality with maternal education (RR 1.24, 95% CI: 0.95–1.61 for compulsory vs tertiary education).ConclusionWe provide detailed evidence about the social patterning of neonatal and infant mortality in Switzerland and reveal important regional differences with about 30% lower risks in French-and Italian-speaking compared with German-speaking regions. Underlying causes for such regional differences, such as cultural, lifestyle, or healthcare-related factors, warrant further exploration to inform and provide an evidence base for public health policies

The effect of the COVID-19 lockdown on mental health care use in South Africa: an interrupted time-series analysis.

AIMS The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and ensuing restrictions have negatively affected the mental health and well-being of the general population, and there is increasing evidence suggesting that lockdowns have led to a disruption of health services. In March 2020, South Africa introduced a lockdown in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, entailing the suspension of all non-essential activities and a complete ban of tobacco and alcohol sales. We studied the effect of the lockdown on mental health care utilisation rates in private-sector care in South Africa. METHODS We conducted an interrupted time-series analysis using insurance claims from 1 January 2017 to 1 June 2020 of beneficiaries 18 years or older from a large private sector medical insurance scheme. We calculated weekly outpatient consultation and hospital admission rates for organic mental disorders, substance use disorders, serious mental disorders, depression, anxiety, other mental disorders, any mental disorder and alcohol withdrawal syndrome. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (OR) for the effect of the lockdown on weekly outpatient consultation and hospital admission rates and the weekly change in rates during the lockdown until 1 June 2020. RESULTS 710 367 persons were followed up for a median of 153 weeks. Hospital admission rates (OR 0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.44) and outpatient consultation rates (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63-0.87) for any mental disorder decreased substantially after the introduction of the lockdown and did not recover to pre-lockdown levels by 1 June 2020. Health care utilisation rates for alcohol withdrawal syndrome doubled after the introduction of the lockdown, but the statistical uncertainty around the estimates was large (OR 2.24; 95% CI 0.69-7.24). CONCLUSIONS Mental health care utilisation rates for inpatient and outpatient services decreased substantially after the introduction of the lockdown. Hospital admissions and outpatient consultations for alcohol withdrawal syndrome increased after the introduction of the lockdown, but statistical uncertainty precludes strong conclusions about a potential unintended effect of the alcohol sales ban. Governments should integrate strategies for ensuring access and continuity of essential mental health services during lockdowns in pandemic preparedness planning

Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology using mendelian randomisation (STROBE-MR): explanation and elaboration.

Mendelian randomisation (MR) studies allow a better understanding of the causal effects of modifiable exposures on health outcomes, but the published evidence is often hampered by inadequate reporting. Reporting guidelines help authors effectively communicate all critical information about what was done and what was found. STROBE-MR (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology using mendelian randomisation) assists authors in reporting their MR research clearly and transparently. Adopting STROBE-MR should help readers, reviewers, and journal editors evaluate the quality of published MR studies. This article explains the 20 items of the STROBE-MR checklist, along with their meaning and rationale, using terms defined in a glossary. Examples of transparent reporting are used for each item to illustrate best practices

Health of singleton neonates in Switzerland through time and crises: a cross-sectional study at the population level, 2007-2022.

BACKGROUND Being exposed to crises during pregnancy can affect maternal health through stress exposure, which can in return impact neonatal health. We investigated temporal trends in neonatal outcomes in Switzerland between 2007 and 2022 and their variations depending on exposure to the economic crisis of 2008, the flu pandemic of 2009, heatwaves (2015 and 2018) and the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS Using individual cross-sectional data encompassing all births occurring in Switzerland at the monthly level (2007-2022), we analysed changes in birth weight and in the rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth through time with generalized additive models. We assessed whether the intensity or length of crisis exposure was associated with variations in these outcomes. Furthermore, we explored effects of exposure depending on trimesters of pregnancy. RESULTS Over 1.2 million singleton births were included in our analyses. While birth weight and the rate of stillbirth have remained stable since 2007, the rate of PTB has declined by one percentage point. Exposure to the crises led to different results, but effect sizes were overall small. Exposure to COVID-19, irrespective of the pregnancy trimester, was associated with a higher birth weight (+12 grams [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.5 to 17.9 grams]). Being exposed to COVID-19 during the last trimester was associated with an increased risk of stillbirth (odds ratio 1.24 [95%CI 1.02 to 1.50]). Exposure to the 2008 economic crisis during pregnancy was not associated with any changes in neonatal health outcomes, while heatwave effect was difficult to interpret. CONCLUSION Overall, maternal and neonatal health demonstrated resilience to the economic crisis and to the COVID-19 pandemic in a high-income country like Switzerland. However, the effect of exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic is dual, and the negative impact of maternal infection on pregnancy is well-documented. Stress exposure and economic constraint may also have had adverse effects among the most vulnerable subgroups of Switzerland. To investigate better the impact of heatwave exposure on neonatal health, weekly or daily-level data is needed, instead of monthly-level data

Authorship inequalities in global health research: the IeDEA Southern Africa collaboration

Background The International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS conducts research in several regions, including in Southern Africa. We assessed authorship inequalities for the Southern African region, which is led by South African and Swiss investigators.Methods We analysed authorships of publications from 2007 to 2020 by gender, country income group, time and citation impact. We used 2020 World Bank categories to define income groups and the relative citation ratio (RCR) to assess citation impact. Authorship parasitism was defined as articles without authors from the countries where the study was conducted. A regression model examined the probability of different authorship positions.Results We included 313 articles. Of the 1064 contributing authors, 547 (51.4%) were women, and 223 (21.0%) were from 32 low-income/lower middle-income countries (LLMICs), 269 (25.3%) were from 13 upper middle-income countries and 572 (53.8%) were from 25 high-income countries (HICs). Most articles (150/157, 95.5%) reporting data from Southern Africa included authors from all participating countries. Women were more likely to be the first author than men (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.83) but less likely to be last authors (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.99). Compared with HIC, LLMIC authors were less likely to publish as first (OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.41) or last author (OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.42). The proportion of women and LLMIC first and last authors increased over time. The RCR tended to be higher, indicating greater impact, if first or last authors were from HIC (p=0.06).Conclusions This analysis of a global health collaboration co-led by South African and Swiss investigators showed little evidence of authorship parasitism. There were stark inequalities in authorship position, with women occupying more first and men more last author positions and researchers from LLMIC being ‘stuck in the middle’ on the byline. Global health research collaborations should monitor, analyse and address authorship inequalities

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Using Mendelian Randomization: The STROBE-MR Statement

Importance: Mendelian randomization (MR) studies use genetic variation associated with modifiable exposures to assess their possible causal relationship with outcomes and aim to reduce potential bias from confounding and reverse causation. Objective: To develop the STROBE-MR Statement as a stand-alone extension to the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guideline for the reporting of MR studies. Design, Setting, and Participants: The development of the STROBE-MR Statement followed the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) framework guidance and used the STROBE Statement as a starting point to draft a checklist tailored to MR studies. The project was initiated in 2018 by reviewing the literature on the reporting of instrumental variable and MR studies. A group of 17 experts, including MR methodologists, MR study design users, developers of previous reporting guidelines, and journal editors, participated in a workshop in May 2019 to define the scope of the Statement and draft the checklist. The draft checklist was published as a preprint in July 2019 and discussed on the preprint platform, in social media, and at the 4th Mendelian Randomization Conference. The checklist was then revised based on comments, further refined through 2020, and finalized in July 2021. Findings: The STROBE-MR checklist is organized into 6 sections (Title and Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Other Information) and includes 20 main items and 30 subitems. It covers both 1-sample and 2-sample MR studies that assess 1 or multiple exposures and outcomes, and addresses MR studies that follow a genome-wide association study and are reported in the same article. The checklist asks authors to justify why MR is a helpful method to address the study question and state prespecified causal hypotheses. The measurement, quality, and selection of genetic variants must be described and attempts to assess validity of MR-specific assumptions should be well reported. An item on data sharing includes reporting when the data and statistical code required to replicate the analyses can be accessed. Conclusions and Relevance: STROBE-MR provides guidelines for reporting MR studies. Improved reporting of these studies could facilitate their evaluation by editors, peer reviewers, researchers, clinicians, and other readers, and enhance the interpretation of their results

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Using Mendelian Randomization: The STROBE-MR Statement.

Importance: Mendelian randomization (MR) studies use genetic variation associated with modifiable exposures to assess their possible causal relationship with outcomes and aim to reduce potential bias from confounding and reverse causation. Objective: To develop the STROBE-MR Statement as a stand-alone extension to the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guideline for the reporting of MR studies. Design, Setting, and Participants: The development of the STROBE-MR Statement followed the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) framework guidance and used the STROBE Statement as a starting point to draft a checklist tailored to MR studies. The project was initiated in 2018 by reviewing the literature on the reporting of instrumental variable and MR studies. A group of 17 experts, including MR methodologists, MR study design users, developers of previous reporting guidelines, and journal editors, participated in a workshop in May 2019 to define the scope of the Statement and draft the checklist. The draft checklist was published as a preprint in July 2019 and discussed on the preprint platform, in social media, and at the 4th Mendelian Randomization Conference. The checklist was then revised based on comments, further refined through 2020, and finalized in July 2021. Findings: The STROBE-MR checklist is organized into 6 sections (Title and Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Other Information) and includes 20 main items and 30 subitems. It covers both 1-sample and 2-sample MR studies that assess 1 or multiple exposures and outcomes, and addresses MR studies that follow a genome-wide association study and are reported in the same article. The checklist asks authors to justify why MR is a helpful method to address the study question and state prespecified causal hypotheses. The measurement, quality, and selection of genetic variants must be described and attempts to assess validity of MR-specific assumptions should be well reported. An item on data sharing includes reporting when the data and statistical code required to replicate the analyses can be accessed. Conclusions and Relevance: STROBE-MR provides guidelines for reporting MR studies. Improved reporting of these studies could facilitate their evaluation by editors, peer reviewers, researchers, clinicians, and other readers, and enhance the interpretation of their results