A J Agopian1, Philip J Lupo1, Michele L Herdt-Losavio2, Peter H Langlois3, Carissa M Rocheleau4, Laura E Mitchell5. 1. Human Genetics Center, Division of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, 1200 Herman Pressler Dr., Houston, TX 77030, USA. 2. New York State Department of Health, Center for Environmental Health, 547 River Street, Troy, NY 12180, USA. 3. Birth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch, Texas Department of State Health Services, PO Box 149347, MC 1964, Austin, TX 78714-9347, USA. 4. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA. 5. Human Genetics Center, Division of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, 1200 Herman Pressler Dr., Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: laura.e.mitchell@uth.tmc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe differences in four high risk periconceptional behaviors (lack of folic acid supplementation, lack of early prenatal care, smoking, and drinking) by maternal occupation. METHODS: Analyses were conducted among women in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study who delivered liveborn infants without birth defects. Periconceptional occupational data were collected using a computer-assisted telephone interview and occupational coding was performed using the 2000 Standard Occupational Classification System. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine whether prevalence of behaviors differed between occupational groups. RESULTS: Subjects included 5153 women employed during early pregnancy from 1997 to 2007. Compared to women in management, business, science, and arts occupations, women in other occupations (e.g., service occupations) were significantly more likely to engage in all four high risk behaviors. Specifically, women in food preparation/serving-related occupations were significantly more likely to engage in all four behaviors compared to women in all other occupational groups (odds ratios: 1.8-3.0), while women in education/training/library occupations were significantly less likely to do so (odds ratios: 0.2-0.5). CONCLUSION: We identified several occupational groups with an increased prevalence of high-risk maternal behaviors during pregnancy. Our findings could aid in developing interventions targeted towards women in these occupational groups.
OBJECTIVE: To describe differences in four high risk periconceptional behaviors (lack of folic acid supplementation, lack of early prenatal care, smoking, and drinking) by maternal occupation. METHODS: Analyses were conducted among women in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study who delivered liveborn infants without birth defects. Periconceptional occupational data were collected using a computer-assisted telephone interview and occupational coding was performed using the 2000 Standard Occupational Classification System. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine whether prevalence of behaviors differed between occupational groups. RESULTS: Subjects included 5153 women employed during early pregnancy from 1997 to 2007. Compared to women in management, business, science, and arts occupations, women in other occupations (e.g., service occupations) were significantly more likely to engage in all four high risk behaviors. Specifically, women in food preparation/serving-related occupations were significantly more likely to engage in all four behaviors compared to women in all other occupational groups (odds ratios: 1.8-3.0), while women in education/training/library occupations were significantly less likely to do so (odds ratios: 0.2-0.5). CONCLUSION: We identified several occupational groups with an increased prevalence of high-risk maternal behaviors during pregnancy. Our findings could aid in developing interventions targeted towards women in these occupational groups.
Authors: Anthony M Vintzileos; Cande V Ananth; John C Smulian; William E Scorza; Robert A Knuppel Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: P W Yoon; S A Rasmussen; M C Lynberg; C A Moore; M Anderka; S L Carmichael; P Costa; C Druschel; C A Hobbs; P A Romitti; P H Langlois; L D Edmonds Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2001 Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Mary E Cogswell; Rebecca H Bitsko; Marlene Anderka; Alissa R Caton; Marcia L Feldkamp; Stacey M Hockett Sherlock; Robert E Meyer; Tunu Ramadhani; James M Robbins; Gary M Shaw; T J Mathews; Marjorie Royle; Jennita Reefhuis Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-09-07 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Ibrahim Zaganjor; Suzan L Carmichael; A J Agopian; Andrew F Olshan; Tania A Desrosiers Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2020-02-26 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Mathias Mund; Frank Louwen; Doris Klingelhoefer; Alexander Gerber Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Muhammad Farhan Asif; Salima Meherali; Ghulam Abid; Muhammad Safdar Khan; Zohra S Lassi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 3.390