ReviewCurrent women's health reviews2018
The Role of Extremes in Interpregnancy Interval in Women at Increased Risk for Adverse Obstetric Outcomes Due to Health Disparities: A Literature Review.
Review in Current women's health reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short interbirth interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a Bayesian network approach.AJOG global reports · 2024Article
- Interconception Care for Primary Care Providers: Consensus Recommendations on Preconception and Postpartum Management of Reproductive-Age Patients With Medical Comorbidities.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe interpregnancy interval (IPI) defines the time between two consecutive gestations. In the general population, women with IPIs that fall outside the recommended 18-24 month range appear to be at modestly increased risk for adverse obstetric outcomes.
objectiveThe aim of this review was to assess the impact of extremes in IPI in populations with an increased baseline risk for adverse obstetric outcomes due to disparities in health and health care, including racial and ethnic groups, adolescents, and those of lower socioeconomic status.
methodsWe conducted a MEDLINE/Pubmed literature search in February 2016. Identified articles were reviewed and assigned a level of evidence.
resultsThe 24 studies included in our final review were mainly retrospective with considerable heterogeneity in definitions and outcomes that prevented a quantitative meta-analysis.
conclusionThe results of our review suggest that at-risk populations may have an increased frequency of shortened IPIs though the impact appears to be moderate and inconsistent. There was insufficient evidence to draw meaningful conclusions regarding a prolonged IPI or the effect of interventions. Based on the current literature, under-served populations are more likely to have a shortened IPI which increased the incidence of prematurity and low birth weight in some groups though the effect on additional obstetric outcomes is difficult to assess.
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.