Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15846669›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Bed rest during pregnancy for preventing miscarriage.

A Aleman, F Althabe, J Belizán, E Bergel

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Chinese herbal medicines for threatened miscarriage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  5. Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage (less than 24 weeks).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Systematic Review of Chinese Medicine for Miscarriage during Early Pregnancy.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2014
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

A Aleman
F Althabe
J Belizán
E Bergel
Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria · ARUniversidad de Montevideo · UYWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMiscarriage is pregnancy loss before 23 weeks of gestational age and it happens in 10% to 15% of pregnancies depending on maternal age and parity. It is associated with chromosomal defects in about a half or two thirds of cases. Many interventions have been used to prevent miscarriage but bed rest is probably the most commonly prescribed especially in cases of threatened miscarriage and history of previous miscarriage. Since the etiology of miscarriage in most of the cases is not related to an excess of activity, it is unlikely that bed rest could be an effective strategy to reduce spontaneous miscarriage.

objectivesTo evaluate the effect of prescription of bed rest during pregnancy to prevent miscarriage in women at high risk of miscarriage. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (July 2004). In addition, we searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, POPLINE, LILACS and EMBASE. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all published, unpublished and ongoing randomized trials with reported data which compare clinical outcomes in pregnant women who were prescribed bed rest in hospital or at home for preventing miscarriage compared with alternative care or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed the methodological quality of included trials using the methods described in the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook. Studies were included irrespective of their methodological quality. MAIN

resultsOnly two studies including 84 women were identified. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of miscarriage in the bed rest group versus the no bed rest group (placebo or other treatment) (relative risk (RR) 1.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 2.58). Neither bed rest in hospital nor bed rest at home showed a significant difference in the prevention of miscarriage. There was a higher risk of miscarriage in those women in the bed rest group than in those in the human chorionic gonadotrophin therapy group with no bed rest (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.22 to 5.11). It seems that the small number of participants included in these studies is a main factor to make this analysis inconclusive. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence of high quality that supports a policy of bed rest in order to prevent miscarriage in women with confirmed fetal viability and vaginal bleeding in first half of pregnancy.

Indexed as

Bed RestPregnancy, High-RiskAbortion, SpontaneousFemaleHumansPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID15846669
PMCPMC8721648
OpenAlexW1542114553

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.