Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36348075›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2023

Lack of evidence for effects of lockdowns on stillbirth rates during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Bavaria: analysis of the Bavarian perinatal survey from 2010 to 2020.

Florian Matthias Stumpfe, Michael Oliver Schneider, Sophia Antoniadis, Andreas Mayr, Tobias Fleckenstein, Christian Staerk, Sven Kehl, Peter Hermanek, Julian Böhm, Anton Scharl and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  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

12 authors.

Florian Matthias StumpfeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital of Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. florian.stumpfe@fau.de.ORCID 0000-0002-1865-5369
Michael Oliver SchneiderDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital of Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Sophia AntoniadisDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital of Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Andreas MayrDepartment of Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Tobias FleckensteinDepartment of Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Christian StaerkDepartment of Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Sven KehlDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital of Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Peter HermanekDepartment of Methods and Perinatology, BAQ, Bavarian Institute for Quality Assurance, Munich, Germany.
Julian BöhmDepartment of Methods and Perinatology, BAQ, Bavarian Institute for Quality Assurance, Munich, Germany.
Anton ScharlKlinik Bad Trissl, Oberaudorf, Germany.
Matthias Wilhelm BeckmannDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital of Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Alexander HeinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital of Erlangen, Universitätsstraße 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternationally, potential effects of national SARS-CoV-2-related lockdowns on stillbirth rates have been reported, but data for Germany, including risk factors for fetal pregnancy outcome, are lacking. The aim of this study is to compare the stillbirth rates during the two first lockdown periods in 2020 with previous years from 2010 to 2019 in a large Bavarian cohort.

methodsThis study is a secondary analysis of the Bavarian perinatal data from 2010 to 2020, including 349,245 births. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed to investigate the effect of two Bavarian lockdowns on the stillbirth rate in 2020 compared to the corresponding periods from 2010 to 2019.

resultsDuring the first lockdown, the stillbirth rate was significantly higher compared to the reference period (4.04 vs. 3.03 stillbirths per 1000 births; P = 0.03). After adjustment for seasonal and long-term trends, this effect can no longer be observed (P = 0.2). During the second lockdown, the stillbirth rate did not differ in univariate (3.46 vs. 2.93 stillbirths per 1000 births; P = 0.22) as well as in multivariable analyses (P = 0.68), compared to the years 2010 to 2019.

conclusionAfter adjustment for known long-term effects, in this study we did not find evidence that the two Bavarian lockdowns had an effect on the rate of stillbirths.

Indexed as

COVID-19StillbirthCommunicable Disease ControlFemaleHumansPandemicsPregnancySARS-CoV-2COVID-19StillbirthsStillborn

Identifiers

PMID36348075
PMCPMC9643984

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.