ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2022
The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-linear association between interpregnancy interval after vaginal delivery and singleton preterm birth: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Intentions for post-abortion contraceptive use among women who received abortion services in health facilities of Harar city and Dire Dawa city.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
- The role of intervening pregnancy loss in the association between interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
- Pregnancy termination and determinant factors among women of reproductive age in Kenya, evidence from Kenyan Demographic and Health Survey 2022: Multilevel analysis.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate whether intervening miscarriages and induced abortions impact the associations between interpregnancy interval after a live birth and adverse pregnancy outcomes.
designPopulation-based cohort study.
settingNorway.
participantsA total of 165 617 births to 143 916 women between 2008 and 2016.
main outcome measuresWe estimated adjusted relative risks for adverse pregnancy outcomes using log-binomial regression, first ignoring miscarriages and induced abortions in the interpregnancy interval estimation (conventional interpregnancy interval estimates) and subsequently accounting for intervening miscarriages or induced abortions (correct interpregnancy interval estimates). We then calculated the ratio of the two relative risks (ratio of ratios, RoR) as a measure of the difference.
resultsThe proportion of short interpregnancy interval (<6 months) was 4.0% in the conventional interpregnancy interval estimate and slightly increased to 4.6% in the correct interpregnancy interval estimate. For interpregnancy interval <6 months, compared with 18-23 months, the RoR was 0.97 for preterm birth (PTB) (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83-1.13), 0.97 for spontaneous PTB ( 95% CI 0.80-1.19), 1.00 for small-for-gestational age ( 95% CI 0.86-1.14), 1.00 for large-for-gestational age (95% CI 0.90-1.10) and 0.99 for pre-eclampsia (95% CI 0.71-1.37). Similarly, conventional and correct interpregnancy intervals yielded associations of similar magnitude between long interpregnancy interval (≥60 months) and the pregnancy outcomes evaluated.
conclusionNot considering intervening pregnancy loss due to miscarriages or induced abortions, results in negligible difference in the associations between short and long interpregnancy intervals and adverse pregnancy outcomes. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Not considering pregnancy loss in interpregnancy interval estimation resulted no meaningful differences in observed risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes.
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.