Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32300758›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2020

A comparison of neonatal outcomes between adolescent and adult mothers in developed countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Katie Marvin-Dowle, Hora Soltani

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Adolescent Mothers' Psychological Wellbeing during Pregnancy and Infant Emotional Health.Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53 · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The importance of nutrition in pregnancy and lactation: lifelong consequences.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2022
    Review
  19. Observational
  20. 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

2 authors.

Katie Marvin-DowleSheffield Hallam University, Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, 34 Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, S10 2BP, UK.
Hora SoltaniSheffield Hallam University, Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, 34 Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, S10 2BP, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence suggests that adolescent pregnancies are at increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes compared to adult pregnancies; however, there are significant inconsistencies in the literature, particularly in studies conducted in developed countries. The objective of this study therefore is to systematically review the current literature with regard to the relationship between adolescent pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. A literature search was conducted in eight electronic databases (AMED, ASSIA, Child Development and Adolescent Studies, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Health Source: Nursing, Maternity and Infant Care, MEDLINE and Scopus. The reference lists of included studies were also hand searched. Studies were included if: they were conducted in countries with very high human development according to the United Nations Human Development Index; reported at least one comparison between adolescents (19 years or under) and adult mothers (20-34 years); and were published between January 1998 and March 2018. Studies were screened for inclusion and data extracted by one reviewer. A second reviewer independently reviewed a sub-set of studies. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 using crude counts reported in the included studies. Sub-group analyses of adolescents aged 17 and under and 18-19 were conducted. Pooled analysis of adjusted odds ratios was also undertaken in order to consider the effect of confounding factors. Meta-analysis effect estimates are reported as risk ratios (RR) and pooled association as adjusted odds ratios (aORs). Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals are presented. After removal of duplicates a total of 1791 articles were identified, of which 20 met the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis showed adolescents to have increased risk of all primary adverse outcomes investigated. Sub-group analysis suggests an increased risk of perinatal death and low birthweight for children born to adolescent mothers; 17 and under (perinatal death: RR 1.50, CI 1.32-1.71: low birthweight RR 1.43, CI 1.20-1.70); 18-19 (perinatal death RR 1.21, CI 1.06-1.37: low birthweight RR 1.10, CI 1.08-1.57). Mothers aged 17 and under were also at increased risk of preterm delivery (RR 1.64, CI 1.54-1.75). Analysis adjusted for confounders showed increased risk of preterm delivery (aOR 1.23, CI 1.09-1.38), very preterm delivery (aOR 1.22, CI 1.03-1.44) and neonatal death (aOR 1.31, CI 1.14-1.52). Findings show that young maternal age is a significant risk factor for adverse neonatal outcomes in developed countries. Adolescent maternal age therefore should be considered as a potential cause for concern in relation to neonatal health and it is recommended that health care professionals respond accordingly with increased support and monitoring.

Indexed as

Adolescent pregnancyMeta-analysisNeonatal outcomesSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32300758
PMCPMC7152816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.