Partner- and partnership-related risk factors for preterm birth among low-income women in Lima,Peru

A woman's partner and the characteristics of their partnership can play an important role in the health of her pregnancy. Yet, with the notable exception of intimate partner violence, there has been little previous research addressing the associations between partner- or partnership-related factors and birth outcomes. This analysis tested the hypothesis that risk factors related specifically to partner or partnership characteristics increased the risk for preterm birth. Between 2003 and 2005, a total of 580 preterm cases (20–36 weeks gestational age at delivery) and 633 term controls (≥37 weeks) were selected from women delivering at an obstetric hospital in Lima, Peru. Each woman completed a confidential, structured interview and provided biological specimens within 48 h after delivery. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations between partner and partnership characteristics and preterm birth. After adjustment for behavioral, demographic, and obstetric risk factors, ever having had a partner with a history of drug use (aOR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.22–2.99), ever having had anal sex (aOR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.07–1.84), having a current partner with a history of visiting prostitutes (aOR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.22–2.33), and perceiving one's current partner as a “womanizer” (aOR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.02–1.77) were significantly associated with an elevated risk of preterm birth when tested in separate models. These four factors were then used to create a composite partnership risk score, which showed an increasing dose-response relationship with preterm birth risk (per additional partner risk factor: aOR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.16–1.49). These results highlight the importance of considering a broader set of risk factors for preterm birth, specifically those related to a woman's partner and partnership characteristics. Further research could clarify the specific mechanisms through which these partner and partnership characteristics may increase the risk of preterm birth.     

A Preliminary Study of the Population-Adjusted Effectiveness of Substance Abuse Prevention Programming: Towards Making IOM Program Types Comparable

The Institute of Medicine distinguishes between programs based on who is targeted: the entire population (universal), those at risk (selective), or persons exhibiting the early stages of use or related problem behavior (indicated). Evaluations suggest that although universal programs can be effective in reducing and preventing substance use, selective and indicated programs are both more effective and have greater cost-benefit ratios. This paper tests these assumptions by comparing the impact of these program types in reducing and preventing substance use at the individual level (i.e., those exposed to intervention services) and in the population (i.e., those exposed and not exposed to intervention services). A meta-analysis was performed on 43 studies of 25 programs to examine program comparability across IOM categories. When examining unadjusted effect sizes at the individual level, universal programs were modestly more successful in reducing tobacco use, but selective and indicated programs were modestly more successful in reducing alcohol and marijuana use. When adjusted to the population level, the average effect sizes for selective and indicated programs were reduced by approximately half. At the population level, universal programs were more successful in reducing tobacco and marijuana use and selective and indicated programs were more successful in reducing alcohol use. Editors’ Strategic Implications: The authors’ focus on the public health value of a prevention strategy is compelling and provides a model for analyses of other strategies and content areas.