This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (34)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Women's Health  • Pregnancy and Breast Feeding  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

From Counting Visits to Measuring Content

Dawn P. Misra, MHS, PhD; Bernard Guyer, MD

JAMA. 1998;279:1661-1662.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In this issue of THE JOURNAL, Kogan and colleagues¹ identified trends in the patterns of prenatal care utilization in the United States from 1981 through 1995. Four measures of utilization were examined. First, the authors examined patterns based on the trimester that care began and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Index of Adequacy of Care (Kessner Index).² Clearly, the trimester that care began is an inadequate measure of prenatal care use because neither the total number of visits nor the number of visits relative to the length of gestation is incorporated. While the IOM Index does consider the number of visits, it has been criticized for failing to incorporate the full length of gestation in considering the adequacy of the number of visits. Second, because both these older indices had limitations, the authors also chose to examine patterns of prenatal care utilization . . . [Full Text of this Article]

From the Department of Maternal and Child Health, Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Md.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Benefits and Limitations of Prenatal Care
Michael D. Kogan, Joyce A. Martin, Stephanie J. Ventura, Greg R. Alexander, Milton Kotelchuck, Fredric D. Frigoletto, Kenneth D. Rosenberg, Judith P. Rooks, Dawn P. Misra, Bernard Guyer, Michael D. Kogan, Joyce A. Martin, Stephanie J. Ventura, Greg R. Alexander, Milton Kotelchuck, and Fredric D. Frigoletto
JAMA. 1998;280(24):2071-2073.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

The Changing Pattern of Prenatal Care Utilization in the United States, 1981-1995, Using Different Prenatal Care Indices
Michael D. Kogan, Joyce A. Martin, Greg R. Alexander, Milton Kotelchuck, Stephanie J. Ventura, and Fredric D. Frigoletto
JAMA. 1998;279(20):1623-1628.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Trends in Prenatal Care Use and Low Birthweight in Southeast Brazil
Goldani et al.
AJPH 2004;94:1366-1371.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Perinatal and Infant Health Among Rural and Urban American Indians/Alaska Natives
Baldwin et al.
AJPH 2002;92:1491-1497.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Holistic Approach to Risk-Screening in Pregnancy with Appalachian Women
Jesse et al.
J Holist Nurs 2002;20:133-151.
ABSTRACT  

Trends in Twin Birth Outcomes and Prenatal Care Utilization in the United States, 1981-1997
Kogan et al.
JAMA 2000;284:335-341.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Benefits and Limitations of Prenatal Care
Kogan et al.
JAMA 1998;280:2071-2073.
FULL TEXT