Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:(JPM). METHODS:We performed a cross-sectional study of all JPM articles indexed in Clarivate Web of Science (WOS), NIH Open Citation Collection, and Altmetric Explorer databases (1973-2022). We identified articles cited ≥100 times in WOS and articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios (RCR, a metric of influence based on citations) and highest Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS, a metric of engagement with social media and public platforms). We performed descriptive analysis to characterize influential articles based on citation rates vs. highest AAS, and quantile regression with bootstrapping to estimate the median differences (95% confidence intervals). RESULTS:We identified 4095 JPM articles that were indexed in the WOS, of which 3,959 (96.7%) had RCRs and 939 (22.9%) had AASs. The study cohort included 34 articles cited ≥100 times and the 34 top-RCR and 34 top-AAS articles, representing 83 unique articles. These influential articles had median 67 citations (IQR 17-114), median RCR 3.4 (IQR 1.7-5.0), and median AAS 14 (IQR 3-28). The majority were observational studies and reviews. Compared to top-AAS articles, top-cited articles had higher median citations (117 [IQR 111-147] vs. 13 [IQR 5-62]; median difference 104.0, 95% CI 86.6-121.4) and citations per year (7.3 [IQR 4.9-10.6] vs. 2.3 [0.7-4.6]; median difference 5.5 [95% CI 3.1-7.9]). Results were similar for top-RCR vs. top-AAS articles. CONCLUSIONS:We identified influential articles during 50 years of JPM, providing insight into the impact of the journal and providing a template for future studies of academic journals.

Introduction Despite a growing body of research on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, there is continued controversy given heterogeneity in the quality and design of published studies. Methods We screened ongoing studies in our sequential, prospective meta-analysis. We pooled individual participant data to estimate the absolute and relative risk (RR) of adverse outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared with confirmed negative pregnancies. We evaluated the risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results We screened 137 studies and included 12 studies in 12 countries involving 13 136 pregnant women. Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection - as compared with uninfected pregnant women - were at significantly increased risk of maternal mortality (10 studies; n=1490; RR 7.68, 95% CI 1.70 to 34.61); admission to intensive care unit (8 studies; n=6660; RR 3.81, 95% CI 2.03 to 7.17); receiving mechanical ventilation (7 studies; n=4887; RR 15.23, 95% CI 4.32 to 53.71); receiving any critical care (7 studies; n=4735; RR 5.48, 95% CI 2.57 to 11.72); and being diagnosed with pneumonia (6 studies; n=4573; RR 23.46, 95% CI 3.03 to 181.39) and thromboembolic disease (8 studies; n=5146; RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 27.12). Neonates born to women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal care unit after birth (7 studies; n=7637; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.08); be born preterm (7 studies; n=6233; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.29) or moderately preterm (7 studies; n=6071; RR 2.92, 95% CI 1.88 to 4.54); and to be born low birth weight (12 studies; n=11 930; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Infection was not linked to stillbirth. Studies were generally at low or moderate risk of bias. Conclusions This analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 infection at any time during pregnancy increases the risk of maternal death, severe maternal morbidities and neonatal morbidity, but not stillbirth or intrauterine growth restriction. As more data become available, we will update these findings per the published protocol.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To ascertain the rate of unexpected findings on carrier screening (CS) and assess whether implications are disclosed to patients. METHODS:We performed a retrospective observational study of subjects who had CS after pre-test counseling from a licensed genetic counselor at a large tertiary care center. We quantified the rate of unexpected finding on CS, defined as manifesting carriers (MCs), genotypes predicting phenotype, and chromosome abnormalities. We determined how often patients were informed of implications. We performed subgroup analyses by type of unexpected finding and calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for carrier testing methodology (genotype) and number of genes tested. RESULTS:A total of 4685 patients had CS over the selected time frame. Of those patients, 412 patients (8.8%) had one unexpected finding and 29 patients (0.6%) had two or more findings. In total, 466 unexpected findings were identified, including 437 MC conditions, 23 genotypes predicting phenotype, and 6 chromosome abnormalities. Patients were informed of the implications for MCs, genotypes predicting phenotype, and chromosome abnormalities in 27.6%, 91.3%, and 100% of cases, respectively. More unexpected findings were detected with sequencing compared to genotyping (OR 2.21 and 95% CI 1.76-2.76) and with ≥200 gene panels compared to <200 gene panels (OR 1.79 and 95% CI 1.47-2.17). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study highlights that nondisclosure of unexpected findings on CS is common and underscores the need for further research to improve post-test counseling and follow-up.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Given slowing secular declines and persistent racial disparities, stillbirth remains a major health burden in the US. We investigate changes in stillbirth rates overall and for Black and White women, and determine how maternal age, delivery year (period), and birth year (cohort) have shaped trends. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We designed a sequential time-series analysis utilising the 1980 to 2020 US vital records data of live births and stillbirths at ≥24 weeks gestation. Stillbirth rates overall and among Black and White women were examined. We undertook an age-period-cohort analysis to evaluate temporal changes in stillbirth trends. FINDINGS/UNASSIGNED:Of 157,192,032 live births and 710,832 stillbirths between 1980 and 2020, stillbirth rates per 1000 births declined from 10.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.5, 10.7) in 1980 to 5.8 (95% CI 5.7, 5.8) in 2020. Stillbirth rates declined from 9.2 to 5.0 per 1000 births among White women (rate ratio [RR] 0.54, 95% CI 0.53, 0.55), and from 17.4 to 10.1 per 1000 births among Black women (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.55, 0.59). Black women experienced persistent two-fold higher rates compared to White women (2.01, 95% CI 1.97, 2.05 in 2020). Stillbirth rates declined until 2005, increased from 2005 to the mid-2010s and plateaued thereafter. Strong cohort effects contributed to declining rates in earlier cohorts (1930-1955) and increasing rates among women born after 1980. INTERPRETATION/UNASSIGNED:Age, period, and birth cohorts greatly influenced US stillbirth rates over the last forty years. The decline in stillbirth rate was evident between 1980 and 2005, however subsequent declines have been minimal, reflecting no further gains for cohorts of women born in 1955-1980 and stagnation of period effects starting in 2005. A significant racial disparity persisted with a two-fold excess in stillbirth rates for Black compared to White women, underscoring the need for targeted health and social policies to address disparities. FUNDING/UNASSIGNED:None.