TABLE 4.
Generalized linear model results of the relationship between different subtypes of congenital heart disease and birth weight in children.*
| ASD |
VSD |
PDA |
TOF |
Total CHD |
||||||
| β (95%CI) | P value | β (95%CI) | P value | β (95%CI) | P value | β (95%CI) | P value | β (95%CI) | P value | |
| The boy | ||||||||||
| Model 1 | −120 (−201, 392) | 0.818 | −252 (−827, −30) | 0.005 | −285 (−449, 276) | 0.668 | −838 (−1321, −397) | 0.038 | 237 (−112, 552) | 0.394 |
| Model 2 | −95 (−152, 278) | 0.912 | −398 (−990, −85) | 0.010 | −175 (−448, 299) | 0.795 | −934 (−1406, −407) | 0.025 | 202 (−243, 577) | 0.515 |
| Model 3 | −86 (−165, 293) | 0.907 | −467 (−1052, −117) | 0.016 | −124 (−423, 275) | 0.541 | −1056 (−1424, −537) | 0.007 | 170 (−220, 460) | 0.278 |
| The Girl | ||||||||||
| Model 1 | −502 (−1004, −199) | 0.032 | −180 (−540, 419) | 0.584 | −152 (−441, 320) | 0.738 | −372 (−663, −99) | 0.019 | −530 (−983, −125) | <0.001 |
| Model 2 | −680 (−1343, −103) | 0.017 | −149 (−598, 537) | 0.721 | −168 (−483, 354) | 0.761 | −527 (−845, −199) | 0.016 | −648 (−1069, −128) | <0.001 |
| Model 3 | −738 (−1519, −295) | 0.009 | −193 (−502, 484) | 0.422 | −283 (−511, −55) | 0.035 | −544 (−906, −194) | 0.012 | −812 (−1359, −285) | <0.001 |
| Total | ||||||||||
| Model 1 | −247 (−762, −56) | 0.036 | −270 (−509, −31) | 0.012 | −306 (−891, 391) | 0.217 | −358 (−778, −93) | 0.034 | −473 (−902, −43) | <0.001 |
| Model 2 | −357 (−965, −107) | 0.033 | −329 (−661, −97) | 0.005 | −274 (−749, 302) | 0.233 | −459 (−895, −112) | 0.023 | −629 (−1018, −128) | 0.005 |
| Model 3 | −461 (−1085, −128) | 0.025 | −426 (−932, −120) | 0.009 | −231 (−628, 393) | 0.206 | −532 (−987, −168) | 0.018 | −973 (−1502, −204) | 0.001 |
*A generalized linear model was used, the dependent variable was birth weight, the independent variable was the type of CHD (ASD, VAD, PDA, and TOF), adjusting for related confounding factors, and β was the model regression coefficient, 95% CI was 95% confidence interval. Model 1: no variable was adjusted; Model 2: adjusting fetal sex, gestational age, gravidity, parity, and apgar score at 1 and 5 min; Model 3: on the basis of Model 2, continuing to adjust the parents’ age, residence (urban and rural), education level, occupation, folic acid supplementation, whether drink, smoke, viral infection, radioactive material exposure, doing physical exercise or not, and family monthly expenditure. In the gender-specific model, the baby’s gender was no longer adjusted. The bold values in the tables represent statistically significant differences.