ArticlePrzeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review2023
Spontaneous miscarriage/abortion in the first trimester and expectant management - a meta-analysis approach.
Article in Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To determine effectiveness and side effects of expectant care in first-trimester miscarriage. An increase in the spontaneous miscarriage rate and its associated complications exerts a burden on the overall health and quality of life of women. Expectant care in a first-trimester miscarriage has shown success ranging 75-80%. This study was designed to search the literature for information on the clinical safety and effectiveness of expectant management on spontaneous miscarriage during the first trimester. Material and methods: The review included studies that included women in expectant care for spontaneous miscarriage in the first trimester. Trial studies were recognized through a methodical and organized database search from PubMed, COCHRANE, MEDLINE, Embase, and bibliography from January 2000 until December 2022. The methodological assessment and risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute criteria. Results: Eleven studies in systematic review and 7 studies in the meta-analysis were included. The included studies showed a low to moderate risk of bias. The odds of success in expectant intervention were low when compared with surgical intervention (odds ratio - OR: OR: 0.37 [0.28, 0.48]) and medical management (OR: 0.47 [0.36, 0.61]), and the need for surgical evacuation was high (OR: 2.59 [1.88, 3.59]). Conclusions: Future trials should consider women's opinions and the effect on quality of life along with clinical consequences, to provide improved suggestions on the efficiency and adverse effects.
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.