SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • PRIDE Study;
  • life-course;
  • epidemiology;
  • children;
  • attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder;
  • pregnancy;
  • asthma;
  • autism

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Study design
  4. Acknowledgements
  5. References

Background

To optimise the health of pregnant women and their children by evidence-based primary and secondary prevention, more scientific knowledge is needed. To overcome the methodological limitations of many studies on pregnancy and child health, which often use a retrospective design, we established the PRIDE (PRegnancy and Infant DEvelopment) Study.

Methods and Results

The PRIDE Study is a large prospective cohort study that aims at including 150 000–200 000 women in early pregnancy to study a broad range of research questions pertaining to pregnancy complications, maternal and child health, and adverse developmental effects in offspring. Women are invited to participate by their prenatal care provider before or at their first prenatal care visit and are asked to fill out web-based questionnaires in gestational weeks 8–10, 17, and 34, as well as biannually throughout childhood. In addition, a food frequency questionnaire and a paternal questionnaire are administered and medical records are consulted. Multiple validation studies will be conducted and paper-and-pencil questionnaires are available for women who cannot or do not want to participate through the Internet. For subgroups of participants, blood and saliva samples for genetic and biochemical analyses are being collected. The pilot phase, which started in July 2011, showed a response rate of 47%. Recruitment will eventually cover all of the Netherlands.

Conclusions

We expect that this study, which will be the largest birth cohort in the world so far, will provide new insights in the aetiology of disorders and diseases that originate in pregnancy. The PRIDE Study is open for collaboration.

Exposures that occur during gestation and early childhood may be associated with diseases and disorders that manifest themselves at birth, during childhood, or even later in life. Indeed, various associations between prenatal or early-life exposures and diseases that are typically diagnosed in childhood have been reported. For instance, maternal use of acetaminophen during pregnancy, in utero exposure to maternal smoking, and delivery by caesarean section have all been implicated to play a role in the aetiology of childhood asthma.[1-3] Furthermore, increased rates of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been found after prenatal exposure to labetalol, preterm birth, and organophosphate exposure,[4-6] while gestational diabetes, vaginal bleeding, and neonatal jaundice may increase the risk of autism.[7, 8] Numerous associations between early-life exposures and diseases that occur in adolescence or adulthood have been reported as well. Classical examples include associations between birthweight and the occurrence of ischemic heart disease,[9, 10] obesity,[11] and diabetes.[12, 13] However, the results of many of these studies focusing on early-life exposures and later diseases are inconsistent. Most likely, many risk factors for disorders such as birth defects, respiratory conditions, autism, ADHD, and childhood cancer, are as yet unknown. Identifying possible risk factors for these and other disorders is a crucial step in the development of preventive measures.

For methodological reasons, birth cohort studies are recommended to answer these types of research questions. By following subjects over time, plausible and potentially causal explanations for the observed associations may be addressed and temporal changes in various factors, such as maternal mental health and blood pressure, may be monitored. As early as the 1950s, the value of birth cohort studies was acknowledged and two large studies, the California Child Health and Development Studies and the Collaborative Perinatal Project,[14, 15] started enrolment at the end of that decade. To date, a total of 17 true longitudinal birth cohorts with at least 5000 participants have been described which all enrolled women prospectively during pregnancy (Table 1).[14-33] Two of these included 100 000 women, and three others are planning to do so. The reported response rates ranged from 30% to as high as 96% with a median response rate of 75%. Regarding data collection, a variety of methods have been used (Table 2). Only six studies collected self-reported data in all three trimesters of pregnancy. Most studies attempted to follow-up their cohorts into childhood. Biological samples were mostly obtained from subgroups of participants only. In addition, almost all birth cohort studies consulted medical or obstetric records to obtain clinical data and linkages to medical registries were often established. In 10 cohorts, mothers or infants were medically examined as well.

Table 1. Overview of longitudinal birth cohort studies with ≥5000 participants which enrolled women prospectively during pregnancy
CohortLocationEnrolment periodTiming of enrolmentSample sizeReported response rate
  1. a

    Peer-reviewed cohort profile is not available, information was extracted from the study websites in July 2012 (JECS: http://www.env.go.jp/en/chemi/hs/jecs/; NINFEA: https://www.progettoninfea.it/index_en; UK Birth Cohort Study: http://www.esrc.ac.uk/funding-and-guidance/tools-and-resources/research-resources/surveys/bcf.aspx).

  2. ABCD, Amsterdam Born Children and their Development; ALSPAC, Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children; C-ABCS, China-Anhui birth cohort study; CCHDS, California Child Health and Development Studies; CPP, Collaborative Perinatal Project; EDD, estimated date of delivery; HHf2, Healthy Habits for Two; JECS, Japan Environment and Children's Study; NR, not reported.

Aarhus Birth Cohort[16, 17]Aarhus, DenmarkSept. 1989–<16 weeks of gestation>20 00075%
ABCD Study[18]Amsterdam, the NetherlandsJan. 2003–March 2004First prenatal care visit826667%
ALSPAC[19, 20]Avon, EnglandApril 1991–Dec. 1992 (EDD)Majority in early pregnancy14 54185%
Born in Bradford[21]Bradford, EnglandMarch 2007–2010Gestational weeks 26–2810 000NR
C-ABCS[22]Anhui, ChinaNov. 2008–Oct. 201055% first trimester; 45% second trimester16 76694%
CCHDS[14]California, USA1959–1966Early pregnancy20 754NR
CPP[15]USA1959First prenatal care visit60 000NR
Danish National Birth Cohort[23, 24]Denmark1996–2003First prenatal care visit100 00030%
Generation R[25, 26]Rotterdam, the NetherlandsApril 2002–Jan. 200676% early pregnancy; 21% mid-pregnancy; 3% late pregnancy888061%
HHf2[27]Odense and Aalborg, DenmarkApril 1984–April 1987Gestational week 3611 98087%
Hokkaido Study[28]Hokkaido, JapanFeb. 2003–<13 weeks of gestation20 000NR
JECSaJapan2011–Early pregnancy100 000NR
National Children's Study[29, 30]USA2009–First trimester100 000NR
NINFEAaItaly2005–Pregnancy10 000NR
Northern Finland Birth Cohort[31]Oulu and Lapland, Finland1966 (EDD)Gestational weeks 24–2812 05896%
Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study[32, 33]Norway1999–2007Gestational weeks 17–18100 00044%
UK Birth Cohort StudyaUK2013–NR110 000
Table 2. Methods of data collection used in existing longitudinal birth cohort studies
CohortSelf-reported dataBiological samplesOther data sources
MethodTiming prenatalPost-partum untilMotherInfant
  1. a

    Only in subgroup.

  2. ABCD, Amsterdam Born Children and their Development; ALSPAC, Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children; C-ABCS, China-Anhui birth cohort study; CCHDS, California Child Health and Development Studies; CPP, Collaborative Perinatal Project; HHf2, Healthy Habits for Two; I, interview; JECS, Japan Environment and Children's Study; NR, not reported; Q, questionnaire.

Aarhus Birth CohortQTrimester 1Medical records, registries
ABCD StudyQEarly pregnancyAdulthoodBloodMedical records, registries, physical examinations
ALSPACQMultiple timesAdulthoodBlood, urine, placenta, hair, toe nailCord blood, umbilical cord, blood, urine, salivaMedical records, environmental monitoring, home observations, education records, physical examinations
Born in BradfordITrimester 3Blood, urineCord bloodMedical records, registries, physical examinations
C-ABCSQMultiple times15 yearsaBloodBloodMedical records, physical examinations
CCHDSIMultiple timesAdolescenceBlood, placentaMedical records, registries, physical examinations
CPPIMultiple timesBloodMedical records, observations, physical examinations
Danish National Birth CohortIMultiple times18 monthsBloodUmbilical cordRegistries
Generation RQMultiple timesAdulthoodBlood, urineCord bloodMedical records, physical examinations
HHf2QTrimester 3Medical records
Hokkaido StudyQTrimester 1School ageBlood, hair, breast milkCord bloodMedical records
JECSQ + IEarly pregnancy13 yearsBlood, urine, hair, breast milkCord blood, blood, urine, hairMedical records, environmental monitoring
National Children's StudyIMultiple times21 yearsBlood, urine, placenta, breast milk, saliva, hair, vaginal swabsCord blood, umbilical cord, meconium, blood, urine, saliva, hairMedical records, environmental monitoring, physical examinations
NINFEAQPregnancy18 monthsSalivaRegistries
Northern Finland Birth CohortQWeeks 24–2814 yearsMedical records, registries, physical examinations
Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort StudyQMultiple times7 yearsBlood, urineRegistries
UK Birth Cohort StudyQNR7 yearsNot specifiedMedical records, registries, environmental monitoring, physical examinations

The existing birth cohort studies provide sufficient data to test a wide range of hypotheses, which already resulted in many research papers. For example, by November 2011 over 500 research papers were published from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, 230+ papers from the Danish National Birth Cohort, and more than 750 publications from the Collaborative Perinatal Project.[34] However, the existing birth cohorts also generate new hypotheses and subsequently pose new research questions which cannot be answered with the data collected, such as possible health risks associated with cellphone use and the effects of organic food consumption by either women or children. In addition, common behaviours may change over time and may affect maternal, fetal, or infant health of this and future generations.[35] To overcome the methodological problems associated with retrospective study designs and to test hypotheses that cannot be studied in the existing birth cohort studies because of power limitations or lack of sufficiently detailed data, we established a new prospective birth cohort study, the PRegnancy and Infant DEvelopment (PRIDE) Study.

The Dutch prenatal care system

The PRIDE Study is based in the Dutch prenatal care system that is unique in the Western world, although it inspired changes in the prenatal care systems of Canada, New Zealand, and the UK. In the Netherlands, midwives are autonomous medical practitioners that are qualified to provide full prenatal care to all women with uncomplicated pregnancies and deliveries. The first prenatal care visit usually takes place around gestational week 8 and frequent contacts are scheduled throughout pregnancy. In case of risk factors or complications, women are referred to a secondary or tertiary care midwife or gynaecologist. In 2008, 84% of pregnant women started their prenatal care in a primary care setting. Approximately half of the pregnant women (47%) started labour in primary care, 33% of women delivered under supervision of a primary care midwife, and the home birth rate was almost 25%.[36]

Goals of the PRIDE Study

We aim to include 150 000–200 000 Dutch women in early pregnancy in the PRIDE Study to evaluate a broad range of research questions pertaining to maternal and child health and adverse developmental effects in offspring. The primary objective of the PRIDE Study is to identify factors to which women may be exposed during pregnancy that potentially affect the health of the future mother or her unborn child at any point in life. The secondary aim of the PRIDE Study is to evaluate specific aspects of preconceptional, prenatal and perinatal care in the Netherlands (e.g. expectations, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of counselling, screening, and prenatal diagnostic procedures and treatment options). In light of these objectives, a multitude of research questions have been formulated for the PRIDE Study. The priority exposures and outcomes are listed in Table 3.

Table 3. Priority exposures and outcomes that guide the data collection of the PRIDE Study
Priority exposuresPriority outcomes
Preconception carePregnancy complications
Maternal genotypeLate miscarriage
Maternal anthropometrics and blood pressurePreterm birth
Medication use, including vaccinesLow birthweight and macrosomia
Maternal chronic conditions and illnessesBirth defects
Maternal depression and depressive symptomsApgar score
Maternal physical and emotional stressDevelopmental delays
Environmental endocrine disruptorsWheezing, asthma, and other respiratory conditions
Occupational exposuresAutism
Nutrition and vitamin supplementsAttention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
Life style habits, including smoking, alcohol consumption, and cellphone useInfectious diseases in childhood
Housing conditions and home environmentObesity (maternal and infant)
Social determinantsDiabetes (maternal and infant)
Breast feedingHypertension (maternal)

Study design

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Study design
  4. Acknowledgements
  5. References

Recruitment

The health care providers in prenatal care play a central role in the enrolment of pregnant women into the PRIDE Study. They are contacted through the professional organisations of midwives, gynaecologists, and general practitioners. Participating health care providers give verbal and written information about the PRIDE Study to pregnant women and encourage them to visit the PRIDE Study website (http://www.pridestudy.nl). On this website, women can fill out the study questionnaires using a personal login code provided by their health care provider. Basically all Dutch pregnant women are eligible for participation; the only two exclusion criteria are (1) maternal age <18 years (in 2008, only 0.1% of deliveries occurred among Dutch women in this age group[36]), and (2) >16 weeks pregnant at intake. Women are asked to participate on a completely voluntary basis and give informed consent digitally through the Internet. In 2011, 99% of Dutch women aged 25–45 years had access to the Internet, 91% through a broadband connection.[37] Paper-and-pencil consent forms and questionnaires are available for women who cannot or do not want to participate through the Internet. In addition, every effort is made to improve response rates, including the careful use of design elements in the study questionnaires,[38] participation in monthly raffles, and regular newsletters. Reassuringly, the Danish National Birth Cohort and the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study did not find indications for considerable bias in exposure–outcome associations resulting from non-participation.[24, 33] The PRIDE Study has been approved by the Regional Committee on Research involving Human Subjects. Recruitment started in the first region in July 2011 and will gradually be expanded to encompass all of the Netherlands in 2012. Inclusion is expected to be finished by the end of 2015.

Data collection

The complete structure of the data collection for the PRIDE Study is shown in Figure 1. In principle, pregnant women are invited to participate in the study by their midwife, gynaecologist, or general practitioner through email and/or a regular letter just before or at their first prenatal care visit. They are asked to complete web-based questionnaires as early in pregnancy as possible, usually during gestational weeks 8–10 (aetiologically relevant period for birth defects), in weeks 17 (before 20-week ultrasound) and 34 (just before delivery for most pregnancies), as well as biannually after giving birth until the infants reach the age of 21 years, starting with the first postnatal questionnaires 2 and 6 months after the expected date of delivery. Specific questionnaires are available in case of a miscarriage or preterm birth. In an extensive review of the literature, it was determined that this relatively new method of data collection is suitable for use among women of reproductive age.[39] Based on the results of this review, we incorporated some important measures in the data collection phase of the PRIDE Study to enhance data quality, such as the use of a mixed-mode design (web-based and paper-and-pencil questionnaires) and initiation of various validation studies for data on, for instance, medication use and pregnancy complications. The questionnaires were especially designed for the PRIDE Study using expertise and example questionnaires from previous research and the existing prospective birth cohort studies. In collaboration with researchers from various medical specialties, including obstetrics, midwifery, paediatrics, psychiatry, psychology and physiology, existing paper questionnaires or parts thereof were selected, modified, and tailored to our web-based application. Whenever possible, validated questionnaires and methods were used and incorporated into the PRIDE Study, such as the Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS), and the Ages and Stages Questionnaires. For exposures for which this was not feasible, including medication use and occupational exposures, an intricate web-based system was developed, in which a tree-like structure with multiple choice questions fed by underlying databases of possible exposures guides the participants to the appropriate answer. In addition to the standard prenatal and postnatal maternal questionnaires, the women may fill out a detailed food frequency questionnaire around gestational weeks 8–10 and invite the future biological father to complete a questionnaire focusing on exposures in the 3 months before the index pregnancy.

figure

Figure 1. Structure of the data collection for the PRIDE Study. The solid boxes represent the primary mode of data collection; the dashed boxes indicate the additional components. FFQ, Food Frequency Questionnaire.

Download figure to PowerPoint

In the informed consent form, permission is asked to consult pharmacy and medical records during pregnancy and after birth. If permission is granted, we will also obtain data from the Netherlands Perinatal Registry, the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, and the Comprehensive Cancer Center the Netherlands to verify specific exposures reported in the questionnaire, to collect more detailed information on both exposures and outcomes, and to assess the potential for bias resulting from non-participation.

Subgroups of participants, including those reporting a diagnosis of certain chronic conditions (e.g. depression, chronic hypertension) or use of selected drugs, such as antidepressants, antihypertensive medications, and statins, as well as all participants living in predefined geographic areas, are being invited to donate four 4.5 mL blood samples in the first part of pregnancy for genetic and biochemical analyses. These regions, which are located throughout the country in both rural and urban areas, are defined by the service areas of the blood draw facilities of the Centers for Medical Diagnostics, at which non-fasting blood samples are taken during routine blood sampling among pregnant women or by special invitation. From three of the four blood samples, serum and plasma is being separated and subdivided into eight units (four serum, three plasma, and one erythrocytes); the fourth sample is whole blood for DNA extraction. All blood samples are stored at −80°C until laboratory analyses. To increase the numbers for future genetic analyses, women who are not included in blood sampling may later be asked to provide a saliva sample using DNA self-collection kits send by regular mail.

In the second prenatal questionnaire, women are also asked to donate a saliva sample to measure cortisol levels, which can be measured from saliva in a reliable and stress-free way[40] and reflect the biologically active (unbound) fraction of serum cortisol.[41] The participating women are sent a polypropylene numbered tube (Salivette® Cortisol, Sarstedt AG & Co, Nümbrecht, Germany) by regular mail and are asked to collect a saliva sample within 10 min after waking up on a weekday, while not brushing their teeth, eat, drink or smoke before taking the sample. The samples are sent back by mail and subsequently stored at −20°C for biochemical analyses in nested case–control designs. Although collecting multiple samples across several days is preferable to assess diurnal changes in cortisol and intra-individual variability, this is not feasible in the PRIDE Study because of participant burden and costs. Salivary cortisol levels in samples collected immediately after waking up have shown a higher day-to-day correlation than afternoon samples,[42] and they will be used as a marker for maternal stress, which is one of the priority exposure of the PRIDE Study.

Power calculation

The PRIDE Study is not only designed for research on relatively rare exposures and outcomes, but also to study interactions between exposures including gene–environment interactions and the risks of more common diseases, such as asthma, autism, and ADHD. Although the PRIDE Study will initially include 150 000–200 000 pregnant women and permission for linkage with medical records and registries as well as exposure to many factors is assessed in the first prenatal questionnaire, we will not be able to conduct analyses using data from all subjects because of refusals, loss to follow-up, and missing values. Therefore, the power calculations are based on a conservative estimate of the size of our study population, namely 120 000, but if more subjects can be included, study power will increase. In the Netherlands, 177 713 infants were born in 2008, of which 7.7% were born preterm (<37 weeks of gestation), 6.2% had a low birthweight (<2500 g), and 2.8% had a major birth defect.[36] Therefore, the expected numbers of cases in our study population of 120 000 children are 9240, 7440 and 3360 for preterm birth, low birthweight, and major birth defects, respectively. However, the number of infants with specific birth defects will be much lower, which limits the number of associations that can be studied with sufficient study power for these outcomes. Prevalences of diseases that manifest in childhood are less readily available for the Netherlands, but may be estimated using prescription rates for drugs used in the treatment of these diseases. Anti-asthma and ADHD medication have been prescribed to 4.9% and 2.1% of children, respectively,[43, 44] corresponding to at least 5880 and 2520 children with asthma and ADHD in our study population. Using these figures, we calculated the minimal exposure prevalences needed to demonstrate a relative risk of at least 2.0 with a type I error of 5% and a type II error of 20%. The results of these calculations are shown in Table 4, which indicates that it will be possible to reliably study even rare exposures and combinations of exposures in relation to the development of various outcomes within the PRIDE Study.

Table 4. Minimal exposure prevalences needed to demonstrate a relative risk of ≥2.0 (α = 0.05, study power 80%), based on 120 000 children
OutcomePrevalence outcome (%)Expected no. of casesMinimal exposure prevalence (%)
  1. ADHD, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Preterm birth7.792400.08
Low birthweight6.274400.10
Major birth defect2.833600.23
Asthma4.958800.13
ADHD2.125200.31

Results of the pilot phase

In the pilot phase (July 2011–April 2012), seven out of eight invited midwife practices and one university hospital enrolled pregnant women into the PRIDE Study. A total of 976 eligible women were invited, of which 459 (47.0%) agreed to participate. This response rate is slightly higher than those in similar birth cohort studies in Denmark (30%) and Norway (44%).[23, 24, 32, 33] The completion rate of the first questionnaire was >95% at a median gestational age of 10 weeks. Less than 1% of the participants preferred paper-and-pencil questionnaires. The consent rates for the additional data collection components were high: 88.9% for the paternal questionnaire (response rate among men 41.2%), 81.9% for the food frequency questionnaire, 88.2% for linkage with the Netherlands Perinatal Registry, 74.7% for review of medical records, 80.2% for review of pharmacy records, and 76.5% for saliva sampling. Blood samples of 266 women were stored. No major problems in the enrolment or data collection methods were identified, but based on feedback from the participants and careful evaluation some minor adjustments were made in content and length of the questionnaires and in technical and logistical aspects of the data collection.

Perspectives

From a public health perspective, it is of major importance to determine whether exposures that occur early in life are causally related to diseases and disorders that manifest themselves at birth, during childhood, or later in life. This scientific information may contribute to the implementation of evidence-based preventive measures for a large number of disorders, including birth defects, low birthweight, asthma, autism, ADHD, obesity, cardiovascular diseases, and diabetes. However, establishing a causal relation between intrauterine or childhood exposures and diseases that occur later in life is challenging, in particular as exposure to the factor of interest and to confounding factors may have taken place years or even decades before the outcome occurs.[45] Prospective birth cohort studies with large sample sizes may overcome many of the methodological shortcomings of cross-sectional and retrospective studies in perinatal and paediatric epidemiology.

With a total of 150 000–200 000 pregnancies, the PRIDE Study will be the largest longitudinal birth cohort study conducted so far. Its prospective design in combination with the use of web-based questionnaires allows us to measure a broad range of exposures in detail in aetiologically relevant time frames. In addition, biomonitoring can be used to validate part of the self-reported data, while linkage with medical records and existing registries enables us to reliably collect clinical data on the health of participating mothers and children. This approach strongly increases data quality by minimising the chance of information bias, especially when compared with retrospective study designs. We believe that this study will provide new and useful insights about the potential role of many prenatal and early-life exposures, such as medical drug use during pregnancy, fever and infections, maternal stress, pregnancy complications, diet, genetic factors, and parental occupational exposures, in the aetiology of a large number of diseases. In the end, these insights may be used to improve maternal and child health by developing and implementing preventive measures in prenatal care and during childhood.

The PRIDE Study is open for collaboration with external groups. As recruitment and data collection are still ongoing, additional measurements may be implemented in the study if warranted. Requests for collaboration and proposals for projects should be sent to project@pridestudy.nl. Requests and proposals are discussed in the PRIDE Study Data Sharing Committee with respect to their study aims, feasibility, overlap with ongoing studies, and financial contributions. After approval by this committee and the Regional Committee on Research involving Human Subjects, a contract including mutual obligations (e.g. data delivery, publication plan, and contribution to the PRIDE Study infrastructure) will be drawn up and collaboration can commence.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Study design
  4. Acknowledgements
  5. References

We gratefully acknowledge all women and their partners who participate in this study. The PRIDE Study could not have been established without the invaluable contribution of participating midwives, gynaecologists, obstetricians, general practitioners, hospitals, and pharmacies. The PRIDE Study was funded by a 2008 Investment Fund Grant from the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre and by the Netherlands Asthma Foundation (grant no. 3.4.10.007). Marleen van Gelder was supported by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO; grant no. 021.001.008). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Study design
  4. Acknowledgements
  5. References
  • 1
    Shaheen SO, Newson RB, Smith GD, Henderson AJ. Prenatal paracetamol exposure and asthma: further evidence against confounding. International Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 39:790794.
  • 2
    Magnus MC, Håberg SE, Stigum H, Nafstad P, London SJ, Vangen S, et al. Delivery by cesarean section and early childhood respiratory symptoms and disorders: the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. American Journal of Epidemiology 2011; 174:12751285.
  • 3
    Gilliland FD, Li YF, Peters JM. Effects of maternal smoking during pregnancy and environmental tobacco smoke on asthma and wheezing in children. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2001; 163:429436.
  • 4
    Pasker-de Jong PCM, Zielhuis GA, van Gelder MMHJ, Pellegrino A, Gabreëls FJM, Eskes TKAB. Antihypertensive treatment during pregnancy and functional development at primary school age in a historical cohort study. BJOG 2010; 117:10801086.
  • 5
    Bhutta AT, Cleves MA, Casey PH, Cradock MM, Anand KJS. Cognitive and behavioral outcomes of school-aged children who were born preterm: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2002; 288:728737.
  • 6
    Bouchard MF, Bellinger DC, Wright RO, Weisskopf MG. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and urinary metabolites of organophosphate pesticides. Pediatrics 2010; 125:e1270e1277.
  • 7
    Gardener H, Spiegelman D, Buka SL. Prenatal risk factors for autism: comprehensive meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry 2009; 195:714.
  • 8
    Maimburg RD, Bech BH, Væth M, Møller-Madsen B, Olsen J. Neonatal jaundice, autism, and other disorders of psychological development. Pediatrics 2010; 126:872878.
  • 9
    Barker DJ, Winter PD, Osmond C, Margetts B, Simmonds SJ. Weight in infancy and death from ischaemic heart disease. Lancet 1989; 334:577580.
  • 10
    Kaijser M, Bonamy AKE, Akre O, Cnattingius S, Granath F, Norman M, et al. Perinatal risk factors for ischemic heart disease: disentangling the roles of birth weight and preterm birth. Circulation 2008; 117:405410.
  • 11
    Yu ZB, Han SP, Zhu GZ, Zhu C, Wang XJ, Cao XG, et al. Birth weight and subsequent risk of obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews 2011; 12:525542.
  • 12
    Whincup PH, Kaye SJ, Owen CG, Huxley R, Cook DG, Anazawa S, et al. Birth weight and risk of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. JAMA 2008; 300:28862897.
  • 13
    Harder T, Roepke K, Diller N, Stechling Y, Dudenhausen JW, Plagemann A. Birth weight, early weight gain, and subsequent risk of type 1 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Epidemiology 2009; 169:14281436.
  • 14
    Van den Berg BJ, Christianson RE, Oechsli FW. The California Child Health and Development Studies of the School of Public Health, University of California at Berkeley. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 1988; 2:265282.
  • 15
    Hardy JB. The Collaborative Perinatal Project: lessons and legacy. Annals of Epidemiology 2003; 13:303311.
  • 16
    Wisborg K, Kesmodel U, Bech BH, Hedegaard M, Henriksen TB. Maternal consumption of coffee during pregnancy and stillbirth and infant death in first year of life: prospective study. British Medical Journal 2003; 326:420423.
  • 17
    Wisborg K, Ingerslev HJ, Henriksen TB. IVF and stillbirth: a prospective follow-up study. Human Reproduction 2010; 25:13121316.
  • 18
    Van Eijsden M, Vrijkotte TGM, Gemke RJBJ, van der Wal MF. Cohort profile: the Amsterdam Born Children and their Development (ABCD) Study. International Journal of Epidemiology 2011; 40:11761186.
  • 19
    Golding J, Pembrey M, Jones R. ALSPAC: the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. I. Study methodology. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2001; 15:7487.
  • 20
    Golding J. The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC): study design and collaborative opportunities. European Journal of Endocrinology 2004; 151 (Suppl. 3):U119U123.
  • 21
    Raynor P. Born in Bradford, a cohort study of babies born in Bradford, and their parents: protocol for the recruitment phase. BMC Public Health 2008; 8:327.
  • 22
    Tao F, Hao J, Huang K, Su P, Cheng D, Xing X, et al. Cohort profile: the China-Anhui birth cohort study. International Journal of Epidemiology 21 June 2012. doi: 10.1093/ije/dys085. [Epub ahead of print]
  • 23
    Olsen J, Melbye M, Olsen SF, Sørensen TIA, Aaby P, Andersen AMN, et al. The Danish National Birth Cohort: its background, structure and aim. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 2001; 29:300307.
  • 24
    Nohr EA, Frydenberg M, Henriksen TB, Olsen J. Does low participation in cohort studies induce bias? Epidemiology 2006; 17:413418.
  • 25
    Jaddoe VWV, van Duijn CM, van der Heijden AJ, Mackenbach JP, Moll HA, Steegers EAP, et al. The Generation R Study: design and cohort update 2010. European Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 25:823841.
  • 26
    Jaddoe VWV, Mackenbach JP, Moll HA, Steegers EAP, Tiemeier H, Verhulst FC, et al. The Generation R Study: design and cohort profile. European Journal of Epidemiology 2006; 21:475484.
  • 27
    Olsen J, Frische G, Poulsen AO, Kirchheiner H. Changing smoking, drinking, and eating behaviour among pregnant women in Denmark: evaluation of a health campaign in a local region. Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine 1989; 17:277280.
  • 28
    Kishi R, Sasaki S, Yoshioka E, Yuasa M, Sata F, Saijo Y, et al. Cohort profile: the Hokkaido Study on Environment and Children's Health in Japan. International Journal of Epidemiology 2011; 40:611618.
  • 29
    Landrigan PJ, Trasande L, Thorpe LE, Gwynn C, Lioy PJ, D'Alton ME, et al. The National Children's Study: a 21-year prospective study of 100 000 American children. Pediatrics 2006; 118:21732186.
  • 30
    Trasande L, Cronk C, Durkin M, Weiss M, Schoeller DA, Gall EA, et al. Environment and obesity in the National Children's Study. Environmental Health Perspectives 2009; 117:159166.
  • 31
    Rantakallio P. The longitudinal study of the Northern Finland birth cohort of 1966. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 1988; 2:5988.
  • 32
    Magnus P, Irgens LM, Haug K, Nystad W, Skjærven R, Stoltenberg C. Cohort profile: the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). International Journal of Epidemiology 2006; 35:11461150.
  • 33
    Nilsen RM, Vollset SE, Gjessing HK, Skjærven R, Melve KK, Schreuder P, et al. Self-selection and bias in a large prospective pregnancy cohort in Norway. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2009; 23:597608.
  • 34
    Klebanoff MA. The Collaborative Perinatal Project: a 50-year retrospective. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2008; 23:28.
  • 35
    Lawlor DA, Andersen AMN, Batty GD. Birth cohort studies: past, present and future. International Journal of Epidemiology 2009; 38:897902.
  • 36
    The Netherlands Perinatal Registry. Perinatal Care in the Netherlands, 2008. Utrecht: The Netherlands Perinatal Registry, 2011.
  • 37
    StatLine Database. ICT use of persons by demographic characteristics [Statistics Netherlands web site]. 2011. http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=71098ned&D1=33,45&D2=2,4&D3=a&HD=110715-1505&HDR=G1&STB=T,G2&P=T [last accessed November 2011].
  • 38
    Edwards PJ, Roberts I, Clarke MJ, DiGuiseppi C, Wentz R, Kwan I, et al. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009; (3)MR000008.
  • 39
    Van Gelder MMHJ, Bretveld RW, Roeleveld N. Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology? American Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 172:12921298.
  • 40
    Kirschbaum C, Hellhammer DH. Salivary cortisol in psychoneuroendocrine research: recent developments and applications. Psychoneuroendocrinology 1994; 19:313333.
  • 41
    Aardal E, Holm AC. Cortisol in saliva: reference ranges and relation to cortisol in serum. European Journal of Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Biochemistry 1995; 33:927932.
  • 42
    Jones NM, Holzman CB, Zanella AJ, Leece CM, Rahbar MH. the Prematurity Study Group. Assessing mid-trimester salivary cortisol levels across three consecutive days in pregnant women using an at-home collection protocol. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2006; 20:425437.
  • 43
    De Vries TW, Tobi H, Schirm E, van den Berg P, Duiverman EJ, de Jong-van den Berg LTW. The gap between evidence-based medicine and daily practice in the management of paediatric asthma. A pharmacy-based population study from The Netherlands. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2006; 62:5155.
  • 44
    Hodgkins P, Sasané R, Meijer WM. Pharmacologic treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children: incidence, prevalence, and treatment patterns in the Netherlands. Clinical Therapeutics 2011; 33:188203.
  • 45
    Smith GD. Assessing intrauterine influences on offspring health outcomes: can epidemiological studies yield robust findings? Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology 2008; 102:245256.