ArticlePLoS medicine2022
Interpregnancy interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes among pregnancies following miscarriages or induced abortions in Norway (2008-2016): A cohort study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- First-Trimester Prediction Models Based on Maternal Characteristics for Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Pooled it
- Risk factors for preterm birth: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational studies.BMC medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Another round, another chance: oocyte developmental competence and outcomes in second IVF attempts-the earlier, the better.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Observational
- Impact of interpregnancy interval after pregnancy loss on clinical pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a retrospective cohort study.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026Article
- Therapeutic effect and anti-inflammatory mechanism of modified Shoutai pills against lipopolysaccharide-induced miscarriage in mice.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2026Article
- Article
- Pooled prevalence and associated factors of overweight/obesity among under-five children in 46 low- and middle-income countries: A cross-sectional analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys data (2015-2024).PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Relationship between prior pregnancy loss and subsequent adverse pregnancy outcomes in women.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
- Short inter-pregnancy interval and birthweight: a reappraisal based on a follow-up study of all women in Norway with two singleton deliveries during 1970-2019.European journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Fear of childbirth prolongs interpregnancy interval: A nationwide register-based quantile logistic regression analysis.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024Article
- Interpregnancy Interval After Clinical Pregnancy Loss and Outcomes of the Next Frozen Embryo Transfer.JAMA network open · 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
- The 'ins' and 'outs' of interpregnancy interval effects: Who contributes, and does it matter?Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 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
backgroundThe World Health Organization recommends to wait at least 6 months after miscarriage and induced abortion before becoming pregnant again to avoid complications in the next pregnancy, although the evidence-based underlying this recommendation is scarce. We aimed to investigate the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes-preterm birth (PTB), spontaneous PTB, small for gestational age (SGA) birth, large for gestational age (LGA) birth, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM)-by interpregnancy interval (IPI) for births following a previous miscarriage or induced abortion. METHODS AND
findingsWe conducted a cohort study using a total of 49,058 births following a previous miscarriage and 23,707 births following a previous induced abortion in Norway between 2008 and 2016. We modeled the relationship between IPI and 6 adverse pregnancy outcomes separately for births after miscarriages and births after induced abortions. We used log-binomial regression to estimate unadjusted and adjusted relative risk (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In the adjusted model, we included maternal age, gravidity, and year of birth measured at the time of the index (after interval) births. In a sensitivity analysis, we further adjusted for smoking during pregnancy and prepregnancy body mass index. Compared to births with an IPI of 6 to 11 months after miscarriages (10.1%), there were lower risks of SGA births among births with an IPI of <3 months (8.6%) (aRR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.79, 0.92, p < 0.01) and 3 to 5 months (9.0%) (aRR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.97, p = 0.01). An IPI of <3 months after a miscarriage (3.3%) was also associated with lower risk of GDM (aRR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.96, p = 0.01) as compared to an IPI of 6 to 11 months (4.5%). For births following an induced abortion, an IPI <3 months (11.5%) was associated with a nonsignificant but increased risk of SGA (aRR 1.16, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.36, p = 0.07) as compared to an IPI of 6 to 11 months (10.0%), while the risk of LGA was lower among those with an IPI 3 to 5 months (8.0%) (aRR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72, 0.98, p = 0.03) compared to an IPI of 6 to 11 months (9.4%). There was no observed association between adverse pregnancy outcomes with an IPI >12 months after either a miscarriage or induced abortion (p > 0.05), with the exception of an increased risk of GDM among women with an IPI of 12 to 17 months (5.8%) (aRR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.40, p = 0.02), 18 to 23 months (6.2%) (aRR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.50, p = 0.03), and ≥24 months (6.4%) (aRR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.34, p = 0.10) compared to an IPI of 6 to 11 months (4.5%) after a miscarriage. Inherent to retrospective registry-based studies, we did not have information on potential confounders such as pregnancy intention and health-seeking bahaviour. Furthermore, we only had information on miscarriages that resulted in contact with the healthcare system.
conclusionsOur study suggests that conceiving within 3 months after a miscarriage or an induced abortion is not associated with increased risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes. In combination with previous research, these results suggest that women could attempt pregnancy soon after a previous miscarriage or induced abortion without increasing perinatal health risks.
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.