Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26334436›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015

Anti-D administration in pregnancy for preventing Rhesus alloimmunisation.

Rosemary D McBain, Caroline A Crowther, Philippa Middleton

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 139 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. FIGO/ICM guidelines for preventing Rhesus disease: A call to action.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Differences in maternal-newborn ABO blood groups and risk of serious infant infection.QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. FetalBiomedicines · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Rosemary D McBainARCH: Australian Research Centre for Health of Women and Babies, Robinson Research Institute, Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Adelaide, Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Road, Adelaide, Australia, 5000.
Caroline A Crowther
Philippa Middleton
University of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring pregnancy, a Rhesus negative (Rh-negative) woman may develop antibodies when her fetus is Rhesus positive (Rh-positive). These antibodies may harm Rh-positive babies.

objectivesTo assess the effects of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin on the incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation when given to Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies given anti-D after 28 weeks of pregnancy, compared with no treatment, placebo or a different regimen of anti-D. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. MAIN

resultsWe included two trials involving over 4500 women, comparing anti-D prophylaxis with no anti-D during pregnancy in this review. Overall, the trials were judged to be at moderate to high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence for pre-specified outcomes was also assessed using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.In regards to primary review outcomes, there did not appear to be a clear difference in the risks of immunisation when women who received anti-D at 28 and 34 weeks' gestation were compared with women who were not given antenatal anti-D: risk ratio (RR) for incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during pregnancy was 0.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.17, two trials, 3902 women; GRADE: low quality evidence); at birth of a Rh-positive infant the RR was 0.42 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.17, two trials, 2297 women); and within 12 months after birth of a Rh-positive infant the average RR was 0.39 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.62, two trials, 2048 women; Tau²: 0.47; I²: 39%; GRADE: low quality evidence). Neither of the trials reported on incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation in subsequent pregnancies.Considering secondary outcomes, in one trial, women receiving anti-D during pregnancy were shown to be less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test (which detects fetal cells in maternal blood) in pregnancy (at 32 to 25 weeks) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88; 1884 women; GRADE: low quality evidence) and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79; 1189 women; GRADE: low quality evidence). No clear differences were seen for neonatal jaundice (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.30; 1882 infants; GRADE: very low quality evidence). Neither of the trials reported on adverse effects associated with anti-D treatment. AUTHORS'

conclusionsExisting studies do not provide conclusive evidence that the use of anti-D during pregnancy benefits either mother or baby in terms of incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during the pregnancy or postpartum, or the incidence of neonatal morbidity (jaundice) (low to very low quality evidence). However women receiving anti-D may be less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test in pregnancy and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (low quality evidence). Fewer women who receive anti-D during pregnancy may have Rhesus D antibodies in a subsequent pregnancy, with benefits for the baby, however this needs to be tested in studies of robust design.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansImmunologic FactorsPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, ThirdRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRh IsoimmunizationRho(D) Immune GlobulinImmunologic FactorsRho(D) Immune Globulin

Identifiers

PMID26334436
PMCPMC7061251
OpenAlexW1916327664

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.