McKay Et Al PAFs Complete Cases PDF
McKay Et Al PAFs Complete Cases PDF
McKay Et Al PAFs Complete Cases PDF
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have demonstrated an association between preterm delivery and increased risk of special
educational need (SEN). The aim of our study was to examine the risk of SEN across the full range of gestation.
Methods and Findings: We conducted a population-based, retrospective study by linking school census data on the
407,503 eligible school-aged children resident in 19 Scottish Local Authority areas (total population 3.8 million) to their
routine birth data. SEN was recorded in 17,784 (4.9%) children; 1,565 (8.4%) of those born preterm and 16,219 (4.7%) of
those born at term. The risk of SEN increased across the whole range of gestation from 40 to 24 wk: 3739 wk adjusted
odds ratio (OR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.121.20; 3336 wk adjusted OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.431.63; 2832 wk
adjusted OR 2.66, 95% CI 2.382.97; 2427 wk adjusted OR 6.92, 95% CI 5.588.58. There was no interaction between
elective versus spontaneous delivery. Overall, gestation at delivery accounted for 10% of the adjusted population
attributable fraction of SEN. Because of their high frequency, early term deliveries (3739 wk) accounted for 5.5% of cases of
SEN compared with preterm deliveries (,37 wk), which accounted for only 3.6% of cases.
Conclusions: Gestation at delivery had a strong, dose-dependent relationship with SEN that was apparent across the whole
range of gestation. Because early term delivery is more common than preterm delivery, the former accounts for a higher
percentage of SEN cases. Our findings have important implications for clinical practice in relation to the timing of elective
delivery.
Please see later in the article for the Editors Summary.
Citation: MacKay DF, Smith GCS, Dobbie R, Pell JP (2010) Gestational Age at Delivery and Special Educational Need: Retrospective Cohort Study of 407,503
Schoolchildren. PLoS Med 7(6): e1000289. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000289
Academic Editor: Tze Kin Lau, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Received February 15, 2010; Accepted April 29, 2010; Published June 8, 2010
Copyright: 2010 MacKay et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: The study was funded by a project grant from NHS Health Scotland. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision
to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; SEN, special educational need; SMR2, Scottish Morbidity Record
* E-mail: [email protected]
Introduction
Infants delivered preterm are at increased risk of neurodevelopmental problems including impaired intelligence and school
performance [1,2]. Amongst preterm infants there is no evidence
of a threshold effect, with the risk declining steadily with advancing
gestational age up to 36 wk. However, there is a lack of
information on whether the increased risk continues across the
early term period (3739 wk of gestation). This question is of
considerable clinical relevance because early term births account
for an increasing proportion of deliveries [3], and many of these
are elective deliveries.
The aim of our study was to investigate the risk of special
educational need (SEN) across the whole spectrum of gestational
age at delivery, and to use these results to determine the
population attributable risks associated with delivery at different
gestational ages.
Methods
Data Sources
Under the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act of
2001, both schools and local education authorities in the United
Kingdom have a statutory duty to identify, assess, and make
provision for children with SEN. The Department of Education
defines SEN as a learning difficulty that requires special
educational provision. In turn, a learning difficulty is defined as
either greater difficulty in learning than a majority of children of
the same age, or a disability that prevents or hinders a child from
making use of educational facilities of the kind that are generally
provided for children of the same age (http://www.teachernet.
gov.uk/_doc/3724/SENCodeOfPractice.pdf).
SEN includes both children with learning disabilities (including
dyslexia, dyspraxia, autism, Aspergers syndrome, and attention
deficit hyperactivity disorder), as well as children with physical
disabilities that impact on learning (including some children with
hearing, motor, and visual impairments). We used data from the
2005 school census. The school census is undertaken annually in
September and the data are provided by head-teachers at each
school and collated by their local education authority. The school
census covers all schools in Scotland irrespective of their funding
source and includes local authority, grant-aided, independent,
and self-governing schools. The response rate is 99.8%. It
includes all primary and secondary school children. It excludes
adults (.19 y of age) who are attending courses held in schools. It
covers mainstream schools, special schools, and special classes
and units within mainstream schools. Children on long-term
illness absence are included. The information is collected at
the level of individual pupils and includes a record of need for
all children with an SEN. Of the 32 Scottish local education
authorities, 19 agreed to participate and provide data from the
school census. The participating authorities covered a total
population of 3.8 million, equivalent to 74% of the Scottish
population (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/Expodata/
Spreadsheets/D5966.xls).
The Scottish Morbidity Record (SMR2) collects information on
all women discharged from Scottish maternity hospitals, including
maternal and infant characteristics, clinical management, and
obstetric complications. The SMR2 is subjected to regular quality
assurance checks and has been more than 99% complete since the
late 1970s [4]. A quality assurance exercise performed in 1997
compared a 5% sample of SMR2 returns (n = 1,414) to case
records and demonstrated that all of the fields used in our study
had less than 2% errors, with the exception of maternal height
PLoS Medicine | www.plosmedicine.org
Statistical Analysis
Continuous variables were summarised by the median and
interquartile range (IQR). Univariate comparisons between groups
were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test, Chi square test, and
Cuzicks test for trend [6] for continuous, categorical, and ordinal
data, respectively. The p-values for all hypothesis tests were twosided and statistical significance was assumed at p,0.05. The
associations between obstetric factors and the risk of SEN were
analysed using univariate and multivariable logistic regression and
presented as odds ratios. The covariates included in the
multivariable analysis were infant sex, maternal age and height,
marital status, parity, birth-weight centile, induction of labour,
mode of delivery, year of delivery, previous spontaneous and
therapeutic deliveries, and 5-min Apgar score.
Missing values for maternal height, deprivation, and maternal
age were created using multiple imputation by chained equations
through the use of the ICE module available in STATA [7].
Variables included in the imputation included all covariates in the
final model and the outcome variable. Five imputed datasets were
created and a sensitivity analysis of complete cases with the
imputed datasets was conducted. Gestation- and sex-specific birthweight centiles were calculated. Year of delivery of the child was
included as a covariate. Years 1980 to 1987 and years 2000 to
2003 were aggregated because of the small numbers of children
born in these years.
Goodness of fit was assessed using a plot of observed versus
expected values as well as residual and influence plots. These
tests showed that the model was an adequate fit to the data. The
area under the ROC curve was equal to 67.6%. Adjusted
population attributable fractions [8] were estimated using
individuals with complete data to determine what proportion
of SEN cases were potentially explained by gestation at delivery.
All statistical analyses were undertaken using STATA V10.1
(Stata Corporation).
2
Table 1. Pregnancy characteristics of schoolchildren according to whether they have special educational needs.
Pregnancy Characteristics
n (%)
n (%)
2427
335 (0.09)
140 (0.7)
2832
3,006 (0.8)
443 (2.2)
3336
16,754 (4.3)
1,281 (6.5)
37
18,617 (4.8)
1,217 (6.1)
38
48,810 (12.6)
2,759 (13.9)
39
77,217 (19.9)
3,848 (19.4)
40
125,067 (32.3)
5,731 (28.9)
41
81,607 (21.1)
3,530 (17.8)
42
15,936 (4.1)
850 (4.3)
43
333 (0.08)
22 (0.11)
Missing
Female
194,648 (50.2)
5,934 (29.9)
Male
193,034 (49.8)
13,887 (70.1)
Missing
Nulliparous
172,935 (44.6)
7,473 (37.7)
Multiparous
214,747 (55.7)
12,348 (62.3)
Missing
No
296,449 (76.5)
15,307 (77.2)
Yes
91,233 (23.5)
4,514 (22.8)
Missing
316,005 (81.5)
15,762 (79.5)
56,360 (14.5)
3,093 (15.6)
$2
15,317 (4.0)
966 (4.9)
Missing
349,982 (90.3)
17,602 (88.8)
33,215 (8.6)
1,918 (9.7)
p-Valuea
,0.001
Sex
,0.001
Parity
,0.001
Induced
0.014
,0.001
$2
4,485 (1.1)
301 (1.5)
Missing
1 (affluent)
63,073 (16.3)
2,731 (13.8)
65,094 (16.9)
3,063 (15.5)
78,692 (20.4)
4,029 (20.4)
80,406 (20.8)
4,317 (21.9)
5 (deprived)
98,837 (25.6)
5,611 (28.4)
Missing
1,580
70
Married
262,980 (67.8)
11,911 (60.1)
Not married
124,702 (32.2)
7,910 (39.9)
Missing
,0.001
Deprivation quintiles
,0.001
Marital status
,0.001
Birth-weight centiles
13
11,447 (3.0)
1,084 (5.5)
410
27,037 (7.0)
1,865 (9.4)
1120
39,238 (10.1)
2,334 (11.8)
2180
233,002 (60.1)
11,110 (56.1)
,0.001
Table 1. Cont.
8190
38,496 (9.9)
1,687 (8.5)
9197
27,094 (7.0)
1,230 (6.2)
98100
11,368 (2.9)
511 (2.6)
Missing
No
373,782 (96.4)
19,023 (96.0)
Yes
13,900 (3.6)
798 (4.0)
Missing
03
2,647 (0.7)
303 (1.5)
47
8,144 (2.1)
782 (4.0)
Pregnancy Characteristics
p-Valuea
Pre-eclampsia
0.001
810
376,891 (97.2)
18,736 (94.5)
Missing
Mode of delivery
Vaginal, cephalic delivery
269,294 (69.5)
13,658 (68.9)
54,346 (14.0)
2,358 (11.9)
Breech delivery
1,601 (0.4)
145 (0.70)
23,846 (6.2)
1,343 (6.8)
10,043 (2.6)
782 (4.0)
1,535 (7.7)
Missing
27 (2331)
28 (2431)
,0.001
,0.001
161 (157165)
162 (157166)
41,328
1,967
,0.001
a
Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous data; Cuzicks nonparametric test for trend for ordinal data; x2 test for categorical data.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000289.t001
Results
Of the 514,118 children included in the school census, 93,340
(18.2%) could not be linked to their obstetric data and 4,998
(5.3%) of these had a record of SEN. Of the 420,778 (81.8%) who
were successfully linked to their obstetric data, 13,275 were
ineligible for inclusion because they fulfilled one or more exclusion
criteria. Of the remaining 407,503 children, 362,688 (89.0%)
children had complete data on all variables and, of these, 17,784
(4.9%) had a record of SEN. The children had a median age of
12 y, with no significant difference according to the presence or
absence of SEN.
Overall, 184,260 (50.8%) infants were male, 18,527 (5.0%) were
born preterm (,37 wk gestation), 58,611 (16.2%) were delivered
by cesarean section, and 10,404 (2.8%) had a 5-min Apgar score
less than eight. The median birth weight was 3,400 g (IQR 3,060
3,740). The mothers had a median age of 28 y (IQR 2431) at
delivery and a median height of 162 cm (IQR 157166). Among
the mothers, 203,114 (56.0%) were multiparous, 115,356 (31.8%)
were unmarried at the time of delivery, and 12,579 (3.5%) suffered
pre-eclampsia. 67,181 (18.5%) had a history of spontaneous
abortion and 35,483 (9.8%) had a history of therapeutic abortion.
Table 1 presents a breakdown of maternal and pregnancy
characteristics according to whether or not the child had an
SEN (Table 1).
PLoS Medicine | www.plosmedicine.org
Table 2. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis of the association between pregnancy characteristics and risk of
special educational needs in schoolchildren.
Pregnancy Characteristics
Multivariablea
Univariate
OR (95% CI)
p-Value
OR (95% CI)
p-Value
2427
9.14 (7.5311.18)
,0.001
6.92 (5.588.58)
0.001
2832
3.21 (2.903.57)
,0.001
2.66 (2.382.97)
,0.001
3336
1.67 (1.571.78)
,0.001
1.53 (1.431.63)
,0.001
37
1.43 (1.341.52)
,0.001
1.36 (1.271.45)
,0.001
38
1.24 (1.181.29)
,0.001
1.19 (1.141.25)
,0.001
39
1.09 (1.051.14)
,0.001
1.09 (1.041.14)
,0.001
40
1.00
41
0.95 (0.900.98)
0.010
0.97 (0.931.01)
42
1.17 (1.091.26)
,0.001
1.16 (1.081.25)
,0.001
43
1.46 (0.952.25)
0.085
1.35 (0.872.09)
0.180
1.00
p for trend
,0.001
0.188
,0.001
Sex
Female
1.00
1.00
Male
2.36 (2.292.43)
,0.001
2.36 (2.282.43)
,0.001
,0.001
1.42 (1.341.51)
,0.001
2024
1.26 (1.211.31)
,0.001
1.21 (1.161.26)
,0.001
2529
1.00
3034
0.92 (0.890.96)
,0.001
0.91 (0.880.95)
3539
0.98 (0.931.04)
0.490
0.93 (0.880.98)
0.012
.39
1.31 (1.171.48)
,0.001
1.19 (1.051.34)
0.005
,20
1.00
p for trend
,0.001
,0.001
,0.001
1.55 (1.421.69)
,0.001
1.25 (1.141.37)
,0.001
150154
1.22 (1.161.28)
,0.001
1.08 (1.031.14)
0.003
155159
1.05 (1.011.09)
0.017
0.99 (0.951.03)
0.609
160164
1.00
165169
0.95 (0.910.99)
0.010
1.01 (0.971.06)
0.566
170174
0.94 (0.891.00)
0.035
1.07 (1.001.13)
0.038
.174
0.92 (0.831.01)
0.071
1.09 (0.971.19)
0.154
1.00
p for trend
0.186
,0.001
Marital status
Married
1.00
Not married
1.40 (1.361.44)
1.00
,0.001
1.36 (1.311.40)
,0.001
Deprivation
1 (affluent)
0.84 (0.800.89)
,0.001
0.95 (0.911.00)
0.100
0.92 (0.880.97)
0.001
0.97 (0.931.02)
0.378
1.00
1.05 (1.011.10)
0.027
0.98 (0.941.03)
0.462
5 (deprived)
1.11 (1.071.16)
,0.001
0.94 (0.900.98)
0.002
1.00
p for trend
0.343
,0.001
Parity
Nulliparous
1.00
Multiparous
1.33 (1.291.37)
1.00
,0.001
1.61 (1.551.66)
,0.001
1.09 (1.051.14)
,0.001
1.00
1.10 (1.061.15)
1.00
,0.001
Table 2. Cont.
Pregnancy Characteristics
$2
Multivariablea
Univariate
OR (95% CI)
p-Value
OR (95% CI)
p-Value
1.27 (1.181.35)
,0.001
1.21 (1.131.30)
,0.001
p for trend
,0.001
,0.001
1.00
1.15 (1.091.20)
,0.001
1.10 (1.041.15)
1.00
,0.001
$2
1.34 (1.191.50)
,0.001
1.26 (1.121.42)
0.001
p for trend
,0.001
,0.001
Birth-weight centiles
13
1.99 (1.862.12)
,0.001
1.95 (1.822.08)
,0.001
410
1.45 (1.381.52)
,0.001
1.43 (1.351.50)
,0.001
1120
1.25 (1.171.31)
,0.001
1.24 (1.181.30)
,0.001
2180
1.00
8190
0.92 (0.880.97)
0.003
0.93 (0.880.98)
0.005
9197
0.95 (0.901.01)
0.103
0.95 (0.891.01)
0.077
98100
0.95 (0.871.04)
0.248
0.93 (0.851.02)
1.00
p for trend
,0.001
0.130
,0.001
Pre-eclampsia
None
1.00
Yes
1.14 (1.061.22)
1.00
0.001
0.99 (0.921.07)
0.016
1.03 (0.991.07)
0.829
Induced
No
1.0
Yes
0.96 (0.930.99)
1.00
0.126
Mode of delivery
Vaginal, cephalic delivery
1.00
0.86 (0.820.89)
1.00
,0.001
1.04 (0.991.09)
0.132
Breech delivery
1.77 (1.492.10)
,0.001
1.22 (1.021.47)
0.031
1.10 (1.041.17)
0.001
1.06 (0.991.13)
0.075
1.54 (1.431.66)
,0.001
1.19 (1.101.29)
,0.001
1.06 (1.001.12)
0.034
1.13 (1.071.20)
,0.001
p for trend
,0.001
,0.001
2.30 (2.042.59)
,0.001
1.66 (1.461.88)
,0.001
47
1.94 (1.802.09)
,0.001
1.55 (1.431.67)
,0.001
810
1.00
1.00
p for trend
,0.001
,0.001
Discussion
Our study demonstrated a strong trend of decreasing risk of
SEN with advancing gestational age at birth. The key finding of
PLoS Medicine | www.plosmedicine.org
Attributable Fractiona
95% CI
2427
0.005
(0.0040.006)
2832
0.011
(0.0100.013)
3336
0.020
(0.0170.024)
37
0.016
(0.0120.020)
38
0.020
(0.0160.028)
39
0.019
(0.0120.027)
42
0.007
(0.0030.010)
43
0.000
(0.0000.000)
Total
0.100
(0.0070.129)
Adjusted for infant sex, maternal age and height, marital status, parity, birthweight centile, induction of labour, mode of delivery, year of delivery, previous
spontaneous and therapeutic deliveries, and 5-min Apgar score.
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000289.t003
Supporting Information
Text S1 Sensitivity analysis.
Found at: doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000289.s001 (0.04 MB
DOC)
Author Contributions
ICMJE criteria for authorship read and met: DFM GCS RD JPP. Agree
with the manuscripts results and conclusions: DFM GCS RD JPP.
Designed the experiments/the study: GCS RD JPP. Analyzed the data:
DFM RD. Collected data/did experiments for the study: RD JPP. Wrote
the first draft of the paper: JPP. Contributed to the writing of the paper:
DFM GCS RD JPP.
References
10. Foulder-Hughes LA, Cooke RW (2003) Motor, cognitive and behavioural
disorders in children born very preterm. Dev Med Child Neurol 45: 97103.
11. McCarton CM, Wallace IF, Divon M, Vaughan JG, Jr. (1996) Cognitive and
neurological development of the premature, small for gestational age infant
through age 6: comparison by birth weight and gestational age. Pediatrics 98:
11671178.
12. Ornstein M, Ohlsson A, Edmonds J, Asztalos E (1991) Neonatal follow-up of
very low birthweight/extremely low birth weight infants to school age: a critical
review. Acta Paediatr Scand 80: 741748.
13. Rickards AL, Kitchen WH, Doyle LW, Ford GW, Kelly EA, et al. (1993)
Cognition, school performance, and behaviour in very low birth weight and
normal birth weight children at 8 years of age: a longitudinal study. J Dev Behav
Pediatr 14: 363368.
14. Stephens BE, Vohr BR (2009) Neurodevelopmental outcome of the premature
infant. Pediatr Clin N Am 56: 631646.
15. Eide MG, Oyen N, Skjaerven R, Bjerkedal T (2007) Associations of birth size,
gestational age, and adult size with intellectual performance: Evidence from a
cohort of Norwegian men. Pediatr Res 62: 636642.
16. Yang S, Platt RW, Kramer MS. Variation in child cognitive ability by week of
gestation among health term births. Am J Epidemiol 2010;171: 399406.
17. Lagerstrom M, Bremme K, Eneroth P, Magnusson D (2001) School
performance and IQ-test scores at age 13 as related to birth weight and
gestational age. Scand J Psychol 32: 316324.
1. Bhutta AT, Cleves MA, Casey PH, Cradock MM, Anand KJS (2002) Cognitive
and behavioural outcomes of school-aged children who were born preterm.
JAMA 288: 728737.
2. Anderson PJ, Doyle LW (2008) Cognitive and educational deficits in children
born extremely preterm. Semin Perinatol 32: 5158.
3. Davidoff MJ, Dias T, Damus K, Russell R, Bettegowda VR, et al. (2006)
Changes in the gestational age distribution among US singleton births; impact
on rates of late preterm birth, 19922002. Semin Perinatol 30: 815.
4. Cole SK (1980) Scottish maternity and neonatal records. Chalmers I,
McIlwaine GM, eds. Perinatal audit and surveillance. London: Royal College
of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. pp 3951.
5. Campbell S, Soothill PW (1993) Detection and management of intra-uterine
growth retardation: a British approach. Chervenak FA, Isaacson GC,
Campbell S, eds. Ultrasound in obstetrics and gynaecology. Volume 2. Boston:
Little Brown. pp 14321435.
6. Cuzick J (2007) A Wilcoxon-type test for trend. Stat Med 4: 8789.
7. Royston P (2007) Multiple imputation of missing values. Stata Journal 4:
227241.
8. Brady A (1998) Adjusted population attributable fractions from logistic
regression. STATA Technical Bulletin STB42 7: 812.
9. Briscoe J, Gathercole SE, Marlow N (2001) Everyday memory and cognitive
ability in children born very prematurely. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 42:
749754.
Editors Summary
increased across the gestation range from 40 to 24 weeks.
Thus, compared to children born at 40 weeks, children born
at 3739 weeks of gestation were 1.16 times as likely to have
an SENan odds ratio of 1.16. Children born at 3336, 28
32, and 2427 weeks were 1.53, 2.66, and 6.92 times as likely
to have an SEN, respectively, as children born at 40 weeks.
Although the risk of SEN was much higher in preterm than in
early term babies, because many more children were born
between 37 and 39 weeks (about a third of babies) than
before 37 weeks (one in 20 babies), early term births
accounted for 5.5% of cases of SEN, whereas preterm
deliveries accounted for only 3.6% of cases.
N
N
N
N
10