ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Analysis of pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in 100 pregnant women with Rh-negative blood type.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pediatricians' Practice Patterns on the Revised 2022 Neonatal Hyperbilirubinemia Guidelines.Pediatric reports · 2026Article
- Neonates at Risk: Understanding the Impact of High-Risk Pregnancies on Neonatal Health.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to explore variations in prenatal care, delivery methods, influencing factors, and neonatal outcomes among Rh-negative pregnant women, so as to improve pregnancy healthcare for this demographic, raise the quality of maternal-fetal management, and safeguard the health of both mother and infant.
methodsThis study included 200 women who received routine prenatal care, exhibited no other pregnancy complications, and were admitted for delivery. They were divided into an observation group (100 Rh-negative blood type) and a control group (100 Rh-positive blood type). The study examined differences in pregnancy management, clinical characteristics and pregnancy outcomes between the two groups.
resultsThe results indicated that singleton pregnancies in Rh-negative mothers are associated with significantly higher rates of postpartum blood loss (305.1 ± 183.8 vs. 246.1 ± 84.9 mL, P = 0.004), neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (39% vs. 23%, P = 0.014), low birth weight (11% vs. 2%, P = 0.01), and NICU admission (30% vs. 18%, P = 0.046) compared to the control group. Among Rh-negative mothers, subgroup analysis by ethnicity revealed a higher incidence of fetal distress in the other ethnic groups compared to the Han and Zhuang groups (16.7%, 0, 6.5%, respectively, P = 0.025). Subgroup analysis based on ABO blood type within Rh-negative mothers did not show any statistical significance in various outcomes (all P > 0.05). Infants with neonatal hyperbilirubinemia born to Rh-negative mothers experienced a quicker resolution of hyperbilirubinemia compared to those whose mothers did not receive intramuscular anti-D immunoglobulin [1.0 (1.0, 1.5) vs. 5.0 (1.5, 10.0), P = 0.002].
conclusionsThe Rh-negative blood type is linked to higher risks of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, low birth weight, and increased postpartum hemorrhage, resulting in detrimental pregnancy outcomes. Administering anti-D immunoglobulin speeds up the resolution of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. Thus, prudent and efficient use of anti-D immunoglobulin can mitigate adverse outcomes for both mothers and newborns.
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.