Skip to main content
Log in

Relationship of Social Network Size to Infant Birth Weight in Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Women

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The “Latina paradox” describes the phenomenon of women born in Mexico having their babies in the US deliver fewer low birth weight babies than White US born women. Social support and networks have been suggested as factors in this paradox. Network size was included in Utah’s Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring Survey (PRAMS) for 4 years. Through an analysis of linked Birth Certificate and PRAMS data, the relationship between birth weight and social networks of four groups of women were examined. Perhaps due to Utah’s unique population characteristics and service-oriented culture, the “Latina paradox” was not demonstrated. However, the study did demonstrate that specific social network size options were positively associated with birth weight, and husbands in either culture (White or Hispanic) appear to be the main source of social support. In addition, this study reinforced the importance of carefully planned and executed surveys that are culturally appropriate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McGlade MS, Saha S, Dahlstrom ME. The Latina paradox: an opportunity for restructuring prenatal care delivery. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(12):2062–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Page RL. Positive pregnancy outcomes in Mexican immigrants: what can we learn? J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2004;33(6):783–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Buekens P, et al. Why do Mexican Americans give birth to few low-birth-weight infants? Am J Epidemiol. 2000;152(4):347–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ventura SJ, Taffel SM. Childbearing characteristics of US- and foreign-born Hispanic mothers. Public Health Rep. 1985;100(6):647–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams RL, Binkin NJ, Clingman EJ. Pregnancy outcomes among Spanish-surname women in California. Am J Public Health. 1986;76(4):387–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Markides KS, Coreil J. The health of Hispanics in the southwestern United States: an epidemiologic paradox. Public Health Rep. 1986;101(3):253–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Collins JW Jr, Shay DK. Prevalence of low birth weight among Hispanic infants with United States-born and foreign-born mothers: the effect of urban poverty. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;139(2):184–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Acevedo-Garcia D, Soobader MJ, Berkman LF. The differential effect of foreign-born status on low birth weight by race/ethnicity and education. Pediatrics. 2005;115(1):e20–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fuentes-Afflick E, Lurie P. Low birth weight and Latino ethnicity. Examining the epidemiologic paradox. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1997;151(7):665–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Callister LC, Birkhead A. Acculturation and perinatal outcomes in Mexican immigrant childbearing women: an integrative review. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2002;16(3):22–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sastry N, Hussey JM. An investigation of racial and ethnic disparities in birth weight in Chicago neighborhoods. Demography. 2003;40(4):701–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Leslie JC, et al. Infant mortality, low birth weight, and prematurity among Hispanic, white, and African American women in North Carolina. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188(5):1238–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gould JB, et al. Perinatal outcomes in two dissimilar immigrant populations in the United States: a dual epidemiologic paradox. Pediatrics. 2003;111(6 Pt 1):e676–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Brown HL, Chireau MV, Jallah Y, Howard D. The “Hispanic paradox”: an investigation of racial disparity in pregnancy outcomes at a tertiary care medical center. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(2):e1–7. discussion 197:e7–e9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Horman S. The role of social support on health throughout the lifecycle. Health Educ. 1989;20(4):18–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Suarez L, Lloyd L, Weiss N, Rainbolt T, Pulley L. Effect of social networks on cancer-screening behavior of older Mexican-American women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994;86(10):775–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Palinkas LA, Wingard DL, Barrett-Connor E. The biocultural context of social networks and depression among the elderly. Soc Sci Med. 1990;30(4):441–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kawachi I, Berkman LF. Social ties and mental health. J Urban Health. 2001;78(3):458–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Birkel RC, Reppucci ND. Social networks, information-seeking, and the utilization of services. Am J Community Psychol. 1983;11(2):185–205.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. St Clair PA, et al. Social network structure and prenatal care utilization. Med Care. 1989;27(8):823–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lantican LS, Corona DF. Comparison of the social support networks of Filipino and Mexican-American primigravidas. Health Care Women Int. 1992;13(4):329–38.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Chan CW, Molossiotis A, Yam BM, Chan SJ, Lam CS. Traveling through the cancer trajectory: social support perceived by women with gynecologic cancer in Hong Kong. Cancer Nurs. 2001;24(5):387–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Arnault DS. Help-seeking and social support in Japanese sojourners. West J Nurs Res. 2002;24(3):295–306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wheatley M. Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Burk ME, Wieser PC, Keegan L. Cultural beliefs and health behaviors of pregnant Mexican-American women: implications for primary care. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1995;17(4):37–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Galanti GA. The Hispanic family and male-female relationships: an overview. J Transcult Nurs. 2003;14(3):180–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. State of Utah. Utah’s vital statistics: birth and deaths. Department of Health, editor; 2003. p. 166 [cited 3 May 2007]; Available from: http://www.health.utah.gov/vitalrecords/pub_vs/ia03/03bx.pdf.

  28. Centers for Disease Control. Pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system (PRAMS) methodology. 2006 [cited 2007, 22 August 2007]; Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/prams/methodology.htm.

  29. Utah Department of Health. Complete indicator profile of low birth weight. 2006 [cited 3 May 2007]; Available from: http://ibis.health.utah.gov/indicator/complete_profile/LBW.html.

  30. US Census. Selected Population Group: Hispanic or Latino. 2000. [cited; Available from: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFIteratedFacts?_event=&geo_id=01000US&_geoContext=01000US&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010&_submenuId=factsheet_2&ds_name=DEC_2000_SAFF&_ci_nbr=400&qr_name=DEC_2000_SAFF_R1010&reg=DEC_2000_SAFF_R1010%3A400&_keyword=&_industry=.

  31. Migration Policy Institute. Migration facts, stats, and maps. 2009 [cited 22 February 2010]; Available from: www.migrationinformation.org/datahub/state.cfm?ID=UT.

  32. US Census. Average family size 2000. 2000 [cited 2008, 24 March 2008]; Available from: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?-geo_id=01000US&-tm_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_M00166&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U.

  33. US Census. Live births and birth rates. 2006 [cited 24 August 2007]; Available from: http://www.census.gov/compendia/smadb/TableA-10.pdf.

  34. Utah Department of Health. Utah named 6th healthiest state in the nation. 2007 [cited; Available from: http://health.utah.gov/uthealthnews/2007/20071105-UHF2007Rank.htm.

  35. Bean LL. Religious membership in Utah. In: Zick CD, Smith KR, editors. Utah at the beginning of the new millennium: a demographic perspective. Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press; 2006. p. 127–34.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gaffney KF. Prenatal risk factors among foreign-born Central American women: a comparative study. Public Health Nurs. 2000;17(6):415–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pascali-Bonaro D, Kroeger M. Continuous female companionship during childbirth: a crucial resource in times of stress or calm. J Midwifery Women’s Health. 2004;49(4 Suppl 1):19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Norbeck JS, Anderson NJ. Life stress, social support, and anxiety in mid- and late-pregnancy among low income women. Res Nurs Health. 1989;12(5):281–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Lagana K. Come bien, camina y no se preocupe–eat right, walk, and do not worry: selective biculturalism during pregnancy in a Mexican American community. J Transcult Nurs. 2003;14(2):117–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Martinez-Schallmoser L, Telleen S, MacMullen NJ. The effect of social support and acculturation on postpartum depression in Mexican American women. J Transcult Nurs. 2003;14(4):329–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rich-Edwards JW, Grizzard TA. Psychosocial stress and neuroendocrine mechanisms in preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(5 Suppl):S30–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Borders AE, et al. Chronic stress and low birth weight neonates in a low-income population of women. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(2 Pt 1):331–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pickett KE, Wilkinson RG. Child wellbeing and income inequality in rich societies: ecological cross sectional study. BMJ. 2007;335(7629):1080.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Dubois L, Girard M. Determinants of birthweight inequalities: population-based study. Pediatr Int. 2006;48(5):470–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Frederick IO, Williams MA, Sales AE, Martin DP, Killien M. Pre-pregnancy body mass index, gestational weight gain, and other maternal characteristics in relation to infant birth weight. Matern Child Health J. 2008;12:557–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bhattacharya S, Campbell DM, Liston WA, Bhattacharya S. Effect of Body Mass Index on pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous women delivering singleton babies. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:168.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cunnington AJ. What’s so bad about teenage pregnancy? J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2001;27(1):36–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. US Department of Health and Human Services. The 2008 HHS poverty guidelines. 2008 [cited 2008 1/27/08]; Available from: http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/08poverty.shtml.

  49. Lenders CM, McElrath TF, Scholl TO. Nutrition in adolescent pregnancy. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2000;12(3):291–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Rastogi M, Wampler KS. Adult daughters’ perceptions of the mother-daughter relationship: a cross-cultural comparison. Fam Relat. 1999;48(3):327–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sadler LS, Clemmens DA. Ambivalent grandmothers raising teen daughters and their babies. J Fam Nurs. 2004;10(2):211–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Visiwanathan M, Siega-Riz AM, Moos MK, Deierlein A, Mumford S, Knaack J, Thieda P, Lux LJ, Lohr KN. Outcomes of maternal weight gain. ARHQ Publication No. 08-E009, May 2008.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane M. Dyer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dyer, J.M., Hunter, R. & Murphy, P.A. Relationship of Social Network Size to Infant Birth Weight in Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Women. J Immigrant Minority Health 13, 487–493 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-010-9331-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-010-9331-y

Keywords