Maternal and Child Health Journal

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 99–109 | Cite as

Adverse Birth Outcomes Among Native-Born and Immigrant Women: Replicating National Evidence Regarding Mexicans at the Local Level

Abstract

Objectives: For almost two decades, the literature has consistently described an epidemiologic paradox relating to better birth outcomes among high-risk groups, particularly new immigrants from Mexico and Southeast Asia. We hypothesize that regardless of their sociodemographic profile, Mexican immigrants will exhibit lower rates of low birth weight and preterm deliveries than native-(U.S.) born women of Mexican origin, non-Hispanic White and Black women, and Puerto Rican women. Methods: We studied 57,324 live-born singleton infants born to residents in the city of Chicago in a linked data set of 1994 birth–death records. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze race/ethnicity differentials in two pregnancy outcome measures, low birth weight and preterm birth. Results: Overall better birth outcome is related to maternal immigrant status regardless of race/ethnic groups. Immigrant Mexican women had a significantly lower risk of both low birth weight [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66–0.91] and preterm births (AOR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.65–0.86) and were at 28% and 33% lower risks of delivering a low birth weight infant or a premature infant, respectively, than non-Hispanic White women.

Adverse birth outcomes preterm delivery low birth rate native-born women immigrant women Hispanic Mexican Black epidemiologic paradox salutogenesis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Becerra, JE, Hogue, CJR, Atrash, HK, Perez, N. Infant mortality among Hispanics: a portrait of heterogeneity. JAMA 1991;2:217–21.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Collins, JW, David, RJ. The differential effect of traditional risk factors on infant birthweight among Blacks and Whites in Chicago. Am J Public Health 1990;80:679–81.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Collins, JW, Shay, DK. Prevalence of low birth weight among Hispanic infants with United States-born and foreign-born mothers: The effect of urban poverty. Am J Epidemiol 1994;2:184–92.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kogan, MD, Alexander, GR, Kotelchuck, M, Nagey, DA. Relation of the content of prenatal care to the risk of low birth weight: Maternal reports of health behavior advice and initial prenatal care procedures. JAMA 1997;271:1340–45.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rumbaut, GR, Weeks, JR. Unraveling a public health enigma: Why do immigrants experience superior perinatal health outcomes? Res Sociol Health Care 1996;13B:337–91.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gould, JB, Leroy, S. Socioeconomic status and low birth weight: A racial comparison. Pediatrics 1988;82:896–904.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hayes-Bautista, DE, Beazconde-Garbanati, L, Hayes-Bautista, M. Latino health in Los Angeles: Family medicine in a changing minority context. Family Practice 1994;3:318–24.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hayes-Bautista, DE, Beazconde-Garbanati, L, Schink, WO, Hayes-Bautista, M. Latino health in California, 1985–1990: Implications for family practice. Family Med 1994;9:556–62.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kleinman, JC, Kessel, SS. Racial differences in low birth weight: Trends and risk factors. N Engl J Med 1987;317:749–53.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Paneth, NS. The problem of low birth weight. The Future of Children: Low Birth Weight 1997;5:19–34.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singh, GK, Yu, SM. Adverse pregnancy outcomes: Differences between US and foreign-born women in major US racial and ethnic groups. Am J Public Health 1996;6:837–43.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stein, A, Campbell, EA, Day, A, McPherson, K, Cooper, PJ. Social adversity, low birth weight, and preterm delivery. Br Med J 1987;295:291–3.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stembera, ZK, Chandra, RK, Dunn, P, Bwibo, NO, Mata, L. Report on the meeting on etiology, prevention, and social implications of low birth weight. Geneva: World Health Organization MCH/LBW/78:1–26.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scribner, R, Dwyer, JH. Acculturation and low birth weight among Latinos in the Hispanic H-HANES. Am J Public Health 1989;9:1263–7.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guendelman, S, English, PB. Effect of United States residence on birth outcomes among Mexican immigrants: An exploratory study. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;9-S30–8.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mendoza, F. The health of Latino children in the United STates. The Future of Children 4:43–72.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zimmerman, RS, Vega, WA, Gil, AG, Warheit, GJ, Apospori, E, Biafora, F. Who is Hispanic? Definitions and their consequences. Am J Public Health 1994;84:1985–7.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Council on Scientific Affairs. Hispanic Health in the United States. JAMA 1991;2:248–52.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Latino Institute. Does Chicago's Population Mirror the National Latino Population? Chicago: Latino Institute, 1993.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Norusis, MJ. SPSS Advanced Statistics 6.1. Chicago: SPSS Inc., 1994Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marcus, AC, Crane, LA. Smoking behavior among UD Latinos: An emerging challenge for public health. Am J Public Health 1985;2:169–72.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Black, SA, Markides, KS. Acculturation and alcohol consumption in Puerto Rican, Cuban-American, and Mexican-American women in the United States. Am J Public Health 1993;83:890–1.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vega, WA, Kolody, B, Aguilar-Gaxiola, S, Alderete, E, et al. Lifetime prevalence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders among urban and rural Mexican Americans in California. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998;55:771–8.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Escobar, J. Immigration and mental health. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998;55:781–2.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cervantes, A. Ecological risk and protective factors for health among Mexican immigrants in Chicago. Thesis, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, 1998.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Marin, BV, Tschann, JM, Gomez, CA, Kegeles, SM. Acculturation and gender differences in sexual attitudes and behaviors: Hispanic vs non-Hispanic white unmarried adults. Am J Public Health 1993;83:1759–61.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Landale and Oropesa. Immigrant children and the children of immigrants: Inter-and intra-ethnic group differences in the United States. Research paper, Population Research Group, Michigan State University, 1995.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Scribner, R. Letter: Infant mortality among Hispanics. The epidemiological paradox. JAMA 1991;16:2065–6.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scribner, R. Mortality among Hispanics. JAMA 1991;16:1238.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scribner, R. Editorial: Paradox as paradigm—The health outcomes of Mexican Americans. Am J Public Health 1996;3:1263–7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner, S. Single parenthood hurts immigrants' economic gains. Population Reference Bureau, Inc. Population Today 1996;24:4–5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economics DivisionCentro de Investigación en Docencia Económica (CIDE), A.C.TenochtitlanMéxico
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNorthwestern University Medical School, The Center for Study of Multiple BirthChicago
  3. 3.Department of Population Sciences, Harvard School of Public HealthHarvard UniversityBoston
  4. 4.Division de EconomiaCentro de Investigación y docencia Economicas, A.C.Lomas de Santa FeMéxico, D.F.

Personalised recommendations