Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12917888›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003

Support during pregnancy for women at increased risk of low birthweight babies.

E D Hodnett, S Fredericks

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Perinatal mortality and adverse pregnancy outcomes in a low-income rural population of women who smoke.Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology · 2012
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Neighbourhood socio-economic status and spontaneous premature birth in Alberta.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2014
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

E D HodnettFaculty of Nursing, 50 St George Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 3H4.
S Fredericks

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies consistently show a relationship between social disadvantage and low birthweight. Many countries have programs offering special assistance to women thought to be at risk for giving birth to a low birthweight infant. These programs may include advice and counselling (about nutrition, rest, stress management, alcohol and recreational drug use), tangible assistance (eg transportation to clinic appointments, help with household responsibilities), and emotional support. The programs may be delivered by multidisciplinary teams of health professionals, by specially trained lay workers, or by a combination of lay and professional workers.

objectivesThe objective of this review was to assess the effects of programs offering additional social support for pregnant women who are believed to be at risk for giving birth to preterm or low birthweight babies. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (30 January 2003). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials of additional support during at-risk pregnancy by either a professional (social worker, midwife, or nurse) or specially trained lay person, compared to routine care. Additional support was defined as some form of emotional support (eg counselling, reassurance, sympathetic listening) and information/advice, either in home visits or during clinic appointments, and could include tangible assistance (eg transportation to clinic appointments, assistance with the care of other children at home). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Double data entry was performed. Study authors were contacted to request additional information. MAIN

resultsSixteen trials involving 13,651 women were included. The trials were generally of good to excellent quality, although 3 used an allocation method likely to introduce bias. Programs offering additional social support for at-risk pregnant women were not associated with improvements in any perinatal outcomes, but there was a reduction in the likelihood of caesarean birth and an increased likelihood of elective termination of pregnancy. Some improvements in immediate maternal psychosocial outcomes were found in individual trials. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsPregnant women need the support of caring family members, friends, and health professionals. While programs which offer additional support during pregnancy are unlikely to prevent the pregnancy from resulting in a low birthweight or preterm baby, they may be helpful in reducing the likelihood of caesarean birth.

Indexed as

Infant, Low Birth WeightPregnancy, High-RiskSocial SupportFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematurePregnancyPregnancy OutcomeRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.