SynthesisPaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2019
Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal outcomes in high-resource settings: An updated systematic review.
Synthesis in Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
74 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Birth spacing and risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023Pooled it
- Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse maternal outcomes in high-resource settings: An updated systematic review.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal outcomes in high-resource settings: An updated systematic review.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- Impact of group antenatal care on lactational amenorrhea method awareness and knowledge: A cluster randomized control trial.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Integrating a Postpartum Contraception Intervention in the Maternal and Child Health Care System of China: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Understanding of Lactational Amenorrhea As a Contraceptive Method Among U.S. Pregnant Women.Breastfeeding medicine : the official journal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine · 2023Trial
- Induction of labor with Foley catheter and risk of subsequent preterm birth: follow-up study of two randomized controlled trials (PROBAAT-1 and -2).Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2021Trial
- Postpartum Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Use Among People With Sickle Cell Disease in the United States.O&G open · 2026Article
- Patterns and determinants of short and long interpregnancy intervals among pregnant women in Ethiopia: a population-based cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Inter-pregnancy interval after caesarean section and subsequent pregnancy outcomes in New South Wales. A data linkage cohort protocol.MethodsX · 2026Article
- Incidence and risk factors for postplacental intrauterine device expulsion in a Brazilian hospital.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Knowledge and Attitude Toward Interpregnancy Interval and Its Impact on Women's Health.Cureus · 2026Review
- Is the Availability of Immediate Inpatient Postpartum Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) Associated with a Decrease in Rapid Repeat Pregnancy?Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2026Article
- What is the meaning of interpregnancy interval after caesarean section for women planning further pregnancies: a mixed method systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Geospatial analysis of area-level social and behavioral factors associated with short interpregnancy intervals in North Carolina, U.S.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Maternal sociodemographic characteristics of short and long interpregnancy intervals in Japan: an analysis using national birth data.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Determinants of preterm birth among newborns delivered at public referral hospitals in Bahir Dar City, Northwest Ethiopia, 2024.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Maternal Age Differences in Interpregnancy Interval and Preterm Birth Associations Accounting for Multiple Epidemiologic Biases.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2025Article
14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis systematic review summarises association between short interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal health outcomes in high-resource settings to inform recommendations for healthy birth spacing for the United States.
methodsFive databases and a previous systematic review were searched for relevant articles published between 1966 and 1 May 2017. We included studies meeting the following criteria: (a) reporting of perinatal health outcomes after a short interpregnancy interval since last livebirth; (b) conducted within a high-resource setting; and (c) estimates were adjusted for maternal age and at least one socio-economic factor.
resultsNine good-quality and 18 fair-quality studies were identified. Interpregnancy intervals <6 months were associated with a clinically and statistically significant increased risk of adverse outcomes in studies of preterm birth (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in 10 of 14 studies); spontaneous preterm birth (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in one of two studies); small-for-gestational age (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in 5 of 11 studies); and infant mortality (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in four of four studies), while four studies of perinatal death showed no association. Interpregnancy intervals of 6-11 and 12-17 months generally had smaller point estimates and confidence intervals that included the null. Most studies were population-based and few included adjustment for detailed measures of key confounders.
conclusionsIn high-resource settings, there is some evidence showing interpregnancy intervals <6 months since last livebirth are associated with increased risks for preterm birth, small-for-gestational age and infant death; however, results were inconsistent. Additional research controlling for confounding would further inform recommendations for healthy birth spacing for the United States.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.