ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2022
A retrospective study of COVID during pregnancy and the outcome of vaginal delivery.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2022. 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neonatal outcomes among pregnant women with COVID-19: a systematic scoping review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of severity and feto-maternal outcomes among COVID-19 infected pregnant females hospitalized at tertiary care center in western Nepal.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Investigating the mode of transmission of COVID-19 through genital secretions, semen, the birth canal, and lactation: A systematic review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2, later named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), are three highly pathogenic and lethal human coronaviruses that have arisen in the last two decades. Pregnant women have a higher risk due to a special state of immunosuppression. However, there is no proof that pregnant women and their babies are more vulnerable to infection, as data is limited.The primary goal of this retrospective study is to examine the effects of early COVID-19 diagnosis and to address the best method of delivery based on medical records of neonatal and maternal outcomes observed at Nepal's Paropakar Maternity Hospital. This retrospective research will determine whether vaginal delivery is healthy compared to cesarean delivery and whether the outcome of a COVID-19 pregnancy in both mother and the baby is independent of the disease's status of the mother. Methods: Study design: The proposed study is a retrospective cross-sectional study. Patients population: 104 cases of COVID positive pregnancy with vaginal delivery or caesarean section. Results: The neonatal outcomes of COVID pregnancy revealed at least 51% baby born with Low APGAR score, 18% born prematurely, 19% with low birth weight, 7% requiring NICU admission, 3% Neonatal asphyxia, and 2% Neonatal death. Furthermore, when normal vaginal delivery and Cesarean section were compared there was no significant between the differences found in the outcomes. Conclusion: The COVID positive status had no association with the perinatal outcomes. Moreover, COVID status rarely affected the course of pregnancy. Guideline: STROCSS 2021.
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.