You are here

Responses

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Short report
Danish premature birth rates during the COVID-19 lockdown
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 12 June 2021
    Preliminary data suggest that COVID-19 pandemic disruption has no impact on preterm births rates in Brazil: early nationwide estimates
    • Enny S Paixao, Research fellow London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
    • Other Contributors:
      • Julia M. Pescarini, Research Fellow
      • Wanderson K. Oliveira, Nurse
      • Giovanny V A França, Ministry of Health technician
      • Elizabeth B Brickley, Assistant professor

    Hedermann and colleagues reported a decreased rate of extremely premature birth as a potential beneficial effect of nationwide COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark1. Although this study provides important new evidence that enhances our understanding of the aetiology of extreme prematurity, comparisons with other populations are vital for delineating the mechanisms underlying the observed beneficial effect. Moreover, uncertainty remains about the direct and indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated lockdowns on live births globally. To begin to address these gaps in knowledge, we used preliminary administrative data from the Brazilian Live Births Information System (SINASC) to assess the effect of COVID-19 and its associated disruptions on prematurity rates in a middle-income country with a high incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Similarly, to Hedermann and colleagues1, we included the months of most intensive social distance interventions (17th March to 31st May 2020)2 and excluded registrations with multiple births. However, to adapt for the Brazilian data, we also excluded congenital abnormalities and used as comparison the same period but only for the year of 2019, due to the Zika virus epidemic that occurred in previous years. We included 613,640 live births from 2019 and 560,691 from 2020. Overall, we observed similar rates of premature births in both years; the proportion of extremely preterm births was 4.57/1000 live births in 2019 vs 4.52/1000 live bi...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.