Birth-weight differences of Roma and non-Roma neonates - public health implications from a population-based study in Hungary

35Citations
Citations of this article
78Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: This study analyses the role of ethnicity-based birth weight differences at term (37-42 weeks) between neonates of Roma and non- Roma populations in Hungary, controlling for socio-demographic and biological characteristics of the mothers. Methods: A cross-sectional survey among 9, 040 mothers coupled with biometric data of the neonates was conducted in 2010. Inclusion criteria were: at term (37-42 weeks gestation) non-pathological pregnancies, and self-reported ethnicity. Birth weight was based on mothers' ethnicity, age, body mass index, education, marital and employment status, poverty level, household amenities, dietary and smoking habits using multiple linear regression. Results: The mean difference between Roma and non-Roma neonates measured without controlling for possible confounding factors was -288.7 gram (p < 0.001, 95% CI = -313.4-263.9). In the linear regression model Roma neonates weighed on average 69.67 grams less than non- Roma neonates (p < 0.001, 95% CI = 30.51-108.83). The mother's underweight BMI, low education and smoking during pregnancy (p < 0.001), age under 18 years, no amenities of housing and insufficient consumption of fruits and dairy products also significantly influenced (p < 0.05) the neonates' birth weight. Conclusion: Roma ethnicity was independently correlated with lower birth-weight among at term neonates, controlling for known risk factors. Roma ethnicity may serve as a proxy for other unmeasured social or biological factors and should be considered an important covariate for measurement among neonates.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Balázs, P., Rákóczi, I., Grenczer, A., & Foley, K. L. (2014). Birth-weight differences of Roma and non-Roma neonates - public health implications from a population-based study in Hungary. Central European Journal of Public Health, 22(1), 24–28. https://doi.org/10.21101/cejph.a3841

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free