Re:British Regulator Urges Home Births Over Hospitals for Un...
by mturmon on Monday December 15, 2014 @06:27PM
(#8755097)
I found the word "slightly" here to be misleading:
"The risk of death or serious complications for babies was the same in all three settings, with one exception: In the case of first-time mothers, home birth slightly increased that risk. Nine in 1,000 cases would experience serious complications, compared with five in 1,000 for babies born in a hospital."
0.5% versus 0.9% is nearly a doubling of risk. That looks significant to me, not slight at all.
And the base rate (~1%) is large enough to make the impact worth considering. (Where on the other hand, a doubling of risk in airplane travel, a very low-risk activity, would not be worth worrying much about.)
The guidance given takes this into account, differentiating between first-time and repeat mothers, but the article sidesteps it.
"The risk of death or serious complications for babies was the same in all three settings, with one exception: In the case of first-time mothers, home birth slightly increased that risk. Nine in 1,000 cases would experience serious complications, compared with five in 1,000 for babies born in a hospital."
0.5% versus 0.9% is nearly a doubling of risk. That looks significant to me, not slight at all.
And the base rate (~1%) is large enough to make the impact worth considering. (Where on the other hand, a doubling of risk in airplane travel, a very low-risk activity, would not be worth worrying much about.)
The guidance given takes this into account, differentiating between first-time and repeat mothers, but the article sidesteps it.