Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 9, 2025

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Maternal Age Differences in Interpregnancy Interval and Preterm Birth Associations Accounting for Multiple
Julie M Petersen1,2,3, Mahsa M Yazdy1, Anne Marie Darling1
1Division for Family Health Data and Analytics, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Background:
People who recently gave birth are strongly advised to wait 6 months before attempting pregnancy. Interpregnancy intervals (IPI) of ≥ 18 months are considered optimal. Current guidance is not tailored based on maternal characteristics (e.g., age).
Objectives:
We evaluated whether maternal age modifies IPI-preterm birth (PTB) associations.
Methods:
From a US retrospective cohort of multiparae (1997-2011), we categorised IPI: < 6, 6-11, 12-17, 18-23 (reference), 24-59 or ≥ 60 months. PTB occurred before 37 0/7 weeks' gestation. We estimated risk ratios (RR) between IPI and PTB using modified Poisson regression, adjusted for potential confounders and stratified by age at prior delivery: < 25 (n = 2484), 25-29 (n = 1626) or ≥ 30 (n = 1209) years. We conducted quantitative bias analysis to adjust for volunteer bias and dependent misclassification between IPI and gestational length (since both are calculated using the estimated start of pregnancy). We computed E-values when RR lower bounds of the 95% simulation intervals were > 1.00.
Results:
Estimates were imprecise due to small numbers. However, in terms of general patterns, PTB risk was highest with < 6 months IPI in all age groups (covariate-adjusted RR point estimates ≥ 1.30). The strongest associations were observed among 25-29 years. For ≥ 30 years, PTB risk was lowest with 6-17 months IPI. After multiple bias adjustments, estimates tended to move downward, but similar patterns remained. For 25-29 years, the lower bound of the 95% simulation interval for < 6 versus 18-23 months IPI was > 1.00, with an E-value of 3.82, suggesting unmeasured confounding would need to be very strong to explain the association.
Conclusions:
Estimates were imprecise. However, our study adds to growing evidence that IPI associations may be weaker among older individuals. Older individuals with shorter IPI may have lower PTB risk than those with currently recommended IPI, but more research is needed.
More Related Videos
09:09Generating a Reproducible Model of Mid-Gestational Maternal Immune Activation using PolyI:C to Study Susceptibility and Resilience in Offspring
Published on: August 17, 2022
07:36Modeling Encephalopathy of Prematurity Using Prenatal Hypoxia-ischemia with Intra-amniotic Lipopolysaccharide in Rats
Published on: November 20, 2015
Related Concept Videos
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Oogenesis
Regression Toward the Mean
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Introduction to Epidemiology