Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26628289›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2015

Treatment of nausea in pregnancy: a cross-sectional multinational web-based study of pregnant women and new mothers.

Kristine Heitmann, Lone Holst, Angela Lupattelli, Caroline Maltepe, Hedvig Nordeng

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06055192 (Prevalence and Burden of Nausea and Vomiting in Pregnant Women in Switzerland), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-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.

NCT06055192 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Prevalence and Burden of Nausea and Vomiting in Pregnant Women in Switzerland: Survey Purity 2022

TypeobservationalSponsorEffik SARan2023 to 2024Enrolled200ConditionsNausea, Vomiting of PregnancyArmsSurvey
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristine HeitmannDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care and Centre for Pharmacy, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. kristine.heitmann@igs.uib.no.
Lone HolstDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care and Centre for Pharmacy, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. lone.holst@igs.uib.no.
Angela LupattelliPharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Research Group, Department of Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. angela.lupattelli@farmasi.uio.no.
Caroline MaltepeThe Motherisk Program, Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada. caroline.maltepe@sickkids.ca.
Hedvig NordengPharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Research Group, Department of Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. h.m.e.nordeng@farmasi.uio.no.
University of Bergen · NOUniversity of Oslo · NOHospital for Sick Children · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe factors related to the treatment of nausea during pregnancy have not yet been investigated in several countries simultaneously. The present study aimed to describe differences in self-reported nausea during pregnancy and the patterns of use for both conventional and herbal medicines across countries. The factors related to nausea and its treatment and the relationships between different self-reported co-morbidities and nausea were also investigated.

methodsThis cross-sectional study used data collected by a web-based questionnaire distributed between October 2011 and February 2012 in several countries within five regions: Western, Northern, and Eastern Europe, North America, and Australia. Women who were pregnant or had a child less than one year old were eligible to participate.

resultsA total of 9113 women were included in the study, whereof 6701 (73.5%) had experienced nausea during pregnancy. Among respondents with nausea, conventional medicines were used by 1201 (17.9%) women and herbal medicines by 556 (8.3%) women. The extent of self-reported nausea and its treatment varied by country. Education, working status, and folic acid use were significantly associated with the use of conventional medicines against nausea. Respondents who had nausea also had a high burden of co-morbidity.

conclusionThe prevalence of nausea was high across all participating countries but its treatment varied, possibly due to cultural differences and differences in attitudes towards medicines. A high degree of co-morbidity was found among respondents with nausea.

Indexed as

AdultAustraliaComorbidityCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeFemaleHumansInternetMultivariate AnalysisNauseaNorth AmericaPlant PreparationsPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsSelf ReportSocioeconomic FactorsPlant Preparations

Identifiers

PMID26628289
PMCPMC4667480
OpenAlexW2182380244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.