ArticleJAMA network open2022
Association of Interpregnancy Interval With Adverse Birth Outcomes.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The association between interpregnancy intervals and preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Antenatal Care Interventions to Increase Contraceptive Use Following Birth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.Global health, science and practice · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Combined hormonal versus nonhormonal versus progestin-only contraceptives for postpartum contraception in lactating individuals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Pre-pregnancy BMI modifies the optimal interpregnancy interval for preventing preterm birth: a population-based retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Interpregnancy Interval and the Degree of Cystocele Across Two Vaginal Deliveries: A Retrospective Self-Controlled Cohort Study Using Transperineal Ultrasound.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- The optimal childbearing age and birth spacing in china: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Relationship between inter-pregnancy interval and risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in subsequent twin pregnancies.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Non-linear association between interpregnancy interval after vaginal delivery and singleton preterm birth: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Association between interpregnancy interval and adverse perinatal outcomes according to maternal age in the context of China's two-child policy.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Interpregnancy interval, air pollution, and the risk of low birth weight: a retrospective study in China.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Interpregnancy interval and adverse perinatal outcomes: A within-individual comparative method.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Interpregnancy Interval After Healthy Live Birth and Subsequent Spontaneous Abortion.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Association of interpregnancy interval with adverse pregnancy outcomes according to the outcomes of the preceding pregnancy: a longitudinal study with 4.7 million live births from Brazil.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
- Factors influencing sex ratio at birth in Krosno, Poland.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Growth Status of Full-Term Infants with Different Sizes for Gestational Age During the First Year of Life.Pediatric health, medicine and therapeutics · 2024Article
- Interactions between long interpregnancy interval and advanced maternal age on neonatal outcomes.World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2023Article
- Surrounding greenness is associated with lower risk and burden of low birth weight in Iran.Nature communications · 2023Article
- The risk of perinatal mortality following short inter-pregnancy intervals-insights from 692 402 pregnancies in 113 Demographic and Health Surveys from 46 countries: a population-based analysis.The Lancet. Global health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Many studies have reported an association of interpregnancy interval (IPI) between 2 consecutive births with adverse birth outcomes in low- and middle-income countries. However, most of these studies ignore the implications of some unmeasured confounders. Objective: To explore the association of IPI with adverse perinatal outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This large-scale cohort study used the Guangdong Provincial Women and Children Health Information System in Guangdong Province, China, to obtain birth data recorded between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2020. Matched-sibling design was used. The final cohort included first-born and second-born sibling pairs delivered by mothers who were permanent residents of Guangdong Province. Exposures: The exposure variable was IPI, which was categorized as follows: less than 6, 6 to 11, 12 to 17, 18 to 23, 24 to 29, 30 to 35, and 36 or more months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome variables were adverse birth outcomes: preterm birth (PTB, gestational age <37 weeks), low birth weight (LBW, <2500 g), and small for gestational age (SGA). Adjusted odds ratio (OR) and interaction odds ratio (IOR) associated with IPI were calculated. Results: The study consisted of 725 392 sibling pairs of multiparous mothers. Among these mothers, 718 111 (99.0%) were aged 20 to 34 years, and 715 583 (98.7%) were of Han Chinese ethnicity. Unmatched analysis showed that a short IPI of less than 6 months was associated with higher risks of PTB (adjusted OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.87-2.06), LBW (adjusted OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.79-1.98), and SGA (adjusted OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.30-1.38) compared with an IPI of 18 to 23 months. These associations were attenuated in the matched-sibling analysis. An association of short IPI (<6 months) with PTB (adjusted IOR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.30-1.51), LBW (adjusted IOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.21-1.40), and SGA (adjusted IOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.11-1.22) remained in the matched analysis. For IPI of 36 months or more, the odds of PTB (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.14) and LBW (adjusted OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19) in the unmatched analysis were also greater than the reference interval (18-23 months), but not for SGA (adjusted OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-0.99). Associations between a long IPI (≥36 months) and PTB (adjusted IOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19) and LBW (adjusted IOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.07-1.26) remained through the sibling comparisons. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study indicated that mothers with a short (<6 months) or long (≥36 months) IPI had greater odds of adverse birth outcomes. The findings may inform family planning policies and guide individuals and families who are planning for another pregnancy in China.
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.