Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35359776›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2022

Perinatal and Neonatal Outcomes in Immigrants From Conflict-Zone Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

Samira Behboudi-Gandevani, Razieh Bidhendi-Yarandi, Mohammad Hossein Panahi, Abbas Mardani, Christina Prinds, Mojtaba Vaismoradi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Samira Behboudi-GandevaniFaculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway.
Razieh Bidhendi-YarandiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Hossein PanahiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abbas MardaniNursing Care Research Center, Department of Medical Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Christina PrindsDepartment of Clinical Research, University South Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Mojtaba VaismoradiFaculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway.
Nord University · NOIranshahr University · IRShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity College South Denmark · DKUniversity of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: There are controversies regarding the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes among immigrants from conflict-zone countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the risk of perinatal and neonatal outcomes among immigrants from conflict-zone countries compared to native-origin women in host countries. Methods: A systematic search on the databases of PubMed/MEDLINE, Results: The search process led to the identification of 40 eligible studies involving 215,718 pregnant women, with an immigration background from the conflict zone, and 12,806,469 women of native origin. The adverse neonatal outcomes of the risk of small for gestational age (Pooled OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.6, 2.1), a 5-min Apgar score <7 (Pooled OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.0, 2.1), stillbirth (Pooled OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.2, 3.0), and perinatal mortality (Pooled OR = 2, 95% CI = 1.6, 2.5) were significantly higher in the immigrant women compared to the women of native-origin. The risk of maternal outcomes, including the cesarean section (C-S) and emergency C-S, instrumental delivery, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes was similar in both groups. Conclusion: Although the risk of some adverse maternal outcomes was comparable in the groups, the immigrant women from conflict-zone countries had a higher risk of neonatal mortality and morbidity, including SGA, a 5-min Apgar score <7, stillbirth, and perinatal mortality compared to the native-origin population. Our review results show the need for the optimization of health care and further investigation of long-term adverse pregnancy outcomes among immigrant women.

Indexed as

Armed ConflictsEmigrants and ImmigrantsPregnancy OutcomeCesarean SectionEmigration and ImmigrationFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyReproducibility of Resultsconflict-zone countriesimmigrantmeta-analysisneonatal outcomesperinatal outcomes

Identifiers

PMID35359776
PMCPMC8962623
OpenAlexW4221038227

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.