ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023
Association between interpregnancy interval and maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes in women with a cesarean delivery: a population-based study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Theory of Planned Behaviour Analysis of Barriers and Facilitators of Immediate Postpartum Contraception Uptake in Southwestern Uganda.Open access journal of contraception · 2026Article
- Non-linear association between interpregnancy interval after vaginal delivery and singleton preterm birth: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Inter-pregnancy interval and uterine rupture during a trial of labour after one previous caesarean delivery and no previous vaginal births: a retrospective population-based cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterpregnancy interval (IPI) has been linked with several maternal and neonatal adverse events in the general population. However, the association between IPI and maternal and neonatal outcomes in women whose first delivery was by cesarean delivery is unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between IPI after cesarean delivery and the risk of maternal and neonatal adverse events.
methodsWomen (aged ≥ 18 years) whose first delivery was cesarean delivery with 2 consecutive singleton pregnancies from the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) database between 2017 and 2019 were included in this retrospective cohort study. In this post-hoc analysis, logistic regression analyses were used to examine IPI (≤ 11, 12-17, 18-23 [reference], 24-35, 36-59, and ≥ 60 months) in relation to the risk of repeat cesarean delivery, maternal adverse events (maternal transfusion, ruptured uterus, unplanned hysterectomy, and admission to an intensive care unit), and neonatal adverse events (low birthweight, premature birth, Apgar score at 5 min < 7, and abnormal conditions of the newborn). Stratified analysis based on age (< 35 and ≥ 35 years) and previous preterm birth.
resultsWe included 792,094 maternities, 704,244 (88.91%) of which underwent a repeat cesarean delivery, 5,246 (0.66%) women had adverse events, and 144,423 (18.23%) neonates had adverse events. After adjusting for confounders, compared to an IPI of 18-23 months, the IPI of ≤ 11 months [odds ratio (OR) = 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.44-1.66], 12-17 months (OR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.33-1.43), 36-59 months (OR = 1.12, 95%CI: 1.10-1.15), and ≥ 60 months (OR = 1.19, 95%CI: 1.16-1.22) were associated with an increased risk of repeat cesarean delivery. In terms of maternal adverse events, only IPI of ≥ 60 months (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.76-0.95) was observed to be associated with decreased risk of maternal adverse events in women aged < 35 years. In analysis of neonatal adverse events, IPI of ≤ 11 months (OR = 1.14, 95%CI: 1.07-1.21), 12-17 months (OR = 1.07, 95%CI: 1.03-1.10), and ≥ 60 months (OR = 1.05, 95%CI: 1.02-1.08) were related to an increased risk of neonatal adverse events.
conclusionBoth short and long IPI were associated with an increased risk of repeat cesarean delivery and neonatal adverse events, and women < 35 years may benefit from a longer IPI.
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.