Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34168106›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2021

Intervals and Outcomes of First and Second Pregnancies in Low-Income Women: A Record-Linkage Longitudinal Prospective Cohort Study.

David C Reardon, Christopher Craver

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

David C ReardonDepartment of Research, Elliot Institute, St. Peters, MO, USA.
Christopher CraverDepartment of Research, Charlotte Lozier Institute, Arlington, VA, USA.
Moi University · KEOrthoCarolina Research Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND The number of pregnancies and interval between pregnancies can have significant impact on a woman's reproductive, psychological, and general health. Exposure to multiple reproductive losses is especially associated with higher rates of negative outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS Medical records from 1999-2012 for all Medicaid beneficiaries born after 1982 in the 17 states that provide coverage for all reproductive services (N=2 162 600) were examined to identify the timing of subsequent pregnancies and their outcomes within 3 years of a first known pregnancy. RESULTS One year after their first pregnancy outcomes, 22.6%, 17.8%, and 11.7% of women who had an induced abortion, a natural loss, or a birth, respectively, conceived at least 1 additional pregnancy. By the second year, the percentage of repeat pregnancies rose to 37.5% after an abortion, 25.6% after a natural loss, and 23.1% after a birth. Graphing the weekly conception rates revealed that women who had abortions and natural losses showed similar patterns of rapid repeat pregnancy, with the rate of second conception spiking quickly within 3 to 4 months after the first pregnancy outcome. CONCLUSIONS These findings support the clinical evidence that pregnancy loss may contribute to rapid repeat pregnancies and may better inform interventions to reduce rapid repeat pregnancies.

Indexed as

GravidityPovertyAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMedicaidPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeProspective StudiesTime FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34168106
PMCPMC8240602
OpenAlexW3177154938

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.