Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24158771›Full record

SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2013

Systematic literature review of the costs of pregnancy in the US.

Lynn Huynh, Mark McCoy, Amy Law, Kevin N Tran, Senta Knuth, Patrick Lefebvre, Sean Sullivan, Mei Sheng Duh

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. How is patient-centred care conceptualized in obstetrical health? comparison of themes from concept analyses in obstetrical health- and patient-centred care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Development of Financial Support Program for High Risk Pregnant Women.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2016
    Article
  16. Prepregnancy Obesity and Birth Outcomes.Maternal and child health journal · 2016
    Article
  17. Understanding High Utilization of Unscheduled Care in Pregnant Women of Low Socioeconomic Status.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    Article
  18. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Lynn HuynhAnalysis Group, Inc., 111 Huntington Avenue, Tenth Floor, Boston, MA, 02199, USA.
Mark McCoy
Amy Law
Kevin N Tran
Senta Knuth
Patrick Lefebvre
Sean Sullivan
Mei Sheng Duh
Analysis Group (United States) · USBayer (United States) · USGroup for Research in Decision Analysis · CAMercer Island School District · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe cost of pregnancy is increasing over time despite the decline in pregnancy rates.

objectiveTo fully elucidate and evaluate the cost drivers of pregnancy in the US for payers, a systematic review was conducted to understand the main cost components and primary factors that contribute to the direct costs of pregnancy, pregnancy-related complications and unintended pregnancy among women of childbearing age (15-44 years). DATA SOURCES: We performed electronic searches in the PubMed database from January 2000 to December 2012, and major women's health and pharmacoeconomics conference proceedings from 2011 to 2012. STUDY SELECTION: The systematic review is comprised of studies that reported pregnancy, pregnancy-related complications, unplanned pregnancy, and pregnancy-induced monetary costs. The review excluded narrative reports, systematic reviews, model-derived cost of pregnancy papers, non-US-based studies, and reports based solely on expert opinions. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsTwo reviewers independently applied the inclusion criteria and assessed the quality of the data collected. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved by consensus or by arbitration through a third party, with reference to the original sources. We collected information on the study design and outcomes for each included study. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines in designing, performing, and reporting of the systematic review.

resultsWe identified 40 studies from electronic and handsearching methods. We classified studies based on the primary research topic focusing on the overall cost of pregnancy (N = 10), cost of pregnancy-related complications (N = 26), cost of unintended pregnancy (N = 2), cost of planned pregnancy (N = 1), or cost of pregnancy by facilities (N = 1). In the quality assessment, randomized, non-randomized, and retrospective database studies had low to moderate risk of bias. We determined primary cost drivers based on the highest cost reported in each study. The identified cost drivers were inpatient care, pregnancy delivery, multiple births, complicated cesarean sections, high-risk pregnancy, preterm birth, low birth weight, complications due to conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, anemia, and cancer, and in vitro fertilization. In 2008, the overall mean cost per hospital stay for pregnancy-related incidence ranged from $3,306 to $9,234 in 2012 dollars. The mean cost of pregnancy-related complications that led to preterm birth was as high as $326,953 for an infant born at 25 weeks. It is estimated that over 50 % of live births were unintended in the US. The difference in the cost of unintended pregnancy and intended pregnancy was approximately $536 million. LIMITATIONS: One limitation of the systematic review was the exclusion of model-based cost studies which were excluded because of the high level of variation and heterogeneity across sources of reported cost. Another limitation of the review is that the cost of pregnancy perspective is restricted to the US.

conclusionPreventing pregnancy-related complications and reducing unintended pregnancies may lower the overall economic burden of pregnancy on the US health care system.

Indexed as

Models, EconomicAdolescentAdultDelivery of Health CareFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnancy, UnplannedUnited StatesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24158771
OpenAlexW1988339481

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.