Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37758648›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2023

Job loss during pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage and stillbirth.

Alessandro Di Nallo, Selin Köksal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

2 authors.

Alessandro Di NalloDondena Centre for Research on Social Dynamics and Public Policy, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4272-9233
Selin KöksalInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0158-1348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionDoes the exposure to job loss during pregnancy increase the risk of miscarriage or stillbirth? SUMMARY ANSWER: The experience of own or partner's job loss during the pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of miscarriageand stillbirth. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Prior research on the psycho-social aspect of pregnancy loss has investigated the contextual and the individual-level stressors. At the contextual level, natural disasters, air pollution, and economic downturns are associated with higher risk of pregnancy loss. At the individual level, intense working schedules and financial strain are linked with increased risk of pregnancy loss both at early and later stages of the gestation. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This work draws on high-quality individual data of 'Understanding Society', a longitudinal survey that has interviewed a representative sample of households living in the UK annually since 2009. Approximately 40 000 households were recruited. The analyses use all the available survey waves (1-12, 2009-2022). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsThe final sample consisted of 8142 pregnancy episodes that contain complete informationon pregnancy outcome and date of conception. Ongoing pregnancies at the time of the interview were excluded from the final sample. The outcome variable indicated whether a pregnancy resulted in a live birth or a pregnancy loss whereas the exposure variable identified the women's or their partner's job loss because of redundancy or a dismissal. Logistic regression models were employed to estimate the relation between job loss during pregnancy and pregnancy loss. The models were adjusted for an array of socio-demographic and economic characteristics following a stepwise approach. Several sensitivity analyses complemented the main findings. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline models controlling for women's demographic background and prior experience of miscarriage estimated an increased risk of pregnancy loss when women were exposed to their own or their partner's job loss during their pregnancy (odds ratio (OR) = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.32, 2.99). When the models were adjusted for all socio-economic and partnership-related covariates the association remained robust (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.73). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: First, the pregnancy outcome and the date of conception were self-reported and may besubjected to recall and social desirability bias. Second, although we adjusted for an array socio-demographic characteristics and self-reported health, other contextual factors might be correlated with both job loss and pregnancy loss. Third, owing to the limited sample size, we could not assess if the main finding holds across different socio-economic strata. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsBy showing that exposure to a job loss during pregnancy increases the risk of miscarriage and stillbirth, we underline the relevance of pregnancy loss as a preventable public health matter. This result also calls for policy designthat enhances labour market protection and social security buffers for pregnant women and their partners. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The authors received the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: H2020 Excellent Science, H2020 European Research Council, Grant/Award Number: 694262 (project DisCont-Discontinuities in Household and Family Formation) and the Economic and Social Research Centre on Micro-Social Change (MiSoC). There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAbortion, SpontaneousFemaleHumansLive BirthPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeStillbirthadverse pregnancy outcomejob lossmiscarriagepsycho-social stressstillbirthUKUnderstanding Society

Identifiers

PMID37758648
PMCPMC10628490

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.