Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28093686›Full record

SynthesisMaternal and child health journal2017

Pregnancy Intention and Pregnancy Outcome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jennifer A Hall, Lorna Benton, Andrew Copas, Judith Stephenson

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Maternal and child health journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
16.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

95 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 210 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Prevalence and Determinants of Unintended Pregnancies among Currently Pregnant, Ever-married Women in Rural and Urban Aligarh: A Community-based Study.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Associations Among Sociodemographic and Contextual Factors and Youth Pregnancy Preferences.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025
    Article

35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 1 institution in 1 country.

Jennifer A HallResearch Department of Reproductive Health, UCL Institute for Women's Health, London, UK. jennifer.hall@ucl.ac.uk.
Lorna BentonDepartment of Population Policy and Practice, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Andrew CopasDepartment of Infection and Population Health, UCL Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, London, UK.
Judith StephensonResearch Department of Reproductive Health, UCL Institute for Women's Health, London, UK.
University College London · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 097268/Z/11/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Previous systematic reviews concluded that rigorous research on the relationships between pregnancy intentions and pregnancy outcomes is limited. They further noted that most studies were conducted in high-income countries and had methodological limitations. We aim to assess the current evidence base for the relationship between pregnancy intention and miscarriage, stillbirth, low birthweight (LBW) and neonatal mortality. In March 2015 Embase, PubMed, Scopus and PsychInfo were searched for studies investigating the relationship between pregnancy intention and the outcomes of interest. Methods Studies published since 1975 and in English, French or Spanish were included. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, read the full text of identified articles and extracted data. Meta-analyses were conducted where possible. Results Thirty-seven studies assessing the relationships between pregnancy intention and LBW were identified. A meta-analysis of 17 of these studies found that unintended pregnancies are associated with 1.41 times greater odds of having a LBW baby (95%CI 1.31, 1.51). Eight studies looking at miscarriage, stillbirth or neonatal death were found. The limited data concerning pregnancy loss and neonatal mortality precluded meta-analysis but suggest these outcomes may be more common in unintended pregnancies. Discussion While there seems to be an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcome in unintended pregnancies, there has been little improvement in either the quantity of evidence from low-income countries or in the quality of evidence generally. Longitudinal studies of pregnancy intention and pregnancy outcome, where pregnancy intention is assessed prospectively with a validated measure and where analyses include confounding or mediating factors, are required in both high- and low-income countries.

Indexed as

IntentionFemaleHumansMothersPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeLow birthweightMeta-analysisMiscarriageNeonatal mortalityPregnancy intentionStillbirthSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28093686
PMCPMC5357274
OpenAlexW2575266496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.