Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34074005›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

The Differences in Clinical Presentation, Management, and Prognosis of Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 between Pregnant and Non-Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Durray Shahwar A Khan, Areeba N Pirzada, Anna Ali, Rehana A Salam, Jai K Das, Zohra S Lassi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.3field-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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Management of Coronavirus Disease-2019 Infection in Pregnancy.Emergency medicine clinics of North America · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Durray Shahwar A KhanDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi 74800, Pakistan.
Areeba N PirzadaDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi 74800, Pakistan.
Anna AliRobinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia.
Rehana A SalamDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi 74800, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0001-5423-7343
Jai K DasDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi 74800, Pakistan.
Zohra S LassiRobinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5350-6334
Aga Khan University · PKThe University of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected millions of people across the globe. Previous coronavirus outbreaks led to worsened symptoms amongst pregnant women, suggesting that pregnant women are at greater risk.

objectivesOur aim is to investigate the differences in clinical presentation, management, and prognosis of COVID-19 infection in pregnant and non-pregnant women.

methodsWe ran a search on electronic databases and analysis of the relevant articles was done using Revie Manager 5.4.

resultsThe review consists of nine studies comprising 591,058 women (28,797 pregnant and 562,261 non-pregnant), with most of the data derived from two large studies. The risk of experiencing fever (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.64-0.85), headache (RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.74-0.79), myalgia (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.89-0.95), diarrhea (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.39-0.43), chest tightness (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.77-0.95), and expectoration (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.21-0.97) were greater amongst non-pregnant COVID-19-infected women. Pregnant women with COVID-19 were less likely to be obese (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.63-0.73) or have a smoking history (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.26-0.39). COVID-19-infected non-pregnant women had a higher frequency of comorbidity such as chronic cardiac disease (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.44-0.77), renal disease (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.29-0.71), and malignancy (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.98), compared to COVID-19-infected pregnant women. The risk of ICU admission (RR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.68-3.05) and requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation (RR: 2.68; 95% CI: 2.07-3.47) were significantly higher amongst pregnant women.

conclusionsAlthough the frequency of risk factors and the risk of experiencing clinical symptoms of COVID-19 were higher among non-pregnant women, COVID-19-infected pregnant women had a higher requirement of ICU admission and invasive mechanical ventilation compared to non-pregnant COVID-19-infected women. More well-conducted studies from varying contexts are needed to draw conclusions. Prospero registration: CRD42020204638.

Indexed as

COVID-19LaboratoriesFemaleHumansPandemicsPregnancyPregnant PeopleSARS-CoV-2child-bearing age womencoronavirus 2COVID-19non-pregnant adultspregnantSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34074005
PMCPMC8197383
OpenAlexW3165676394

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.