ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Pregnancy and physical disability: A scoping review.
Article in Women's health (London, England). 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.
- Learning from the Implementation of Disability-Inclusive Maternity Care: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A lack of evidence for disability-inclusive maternal health interventions and promising progress: an updated systematic review.Frontiers in global women's health · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWomen with disabilities have a similar desire for pregnancy as their non-disabled peers but experience more ambivalence and doubt about their intention to have a child. While many have healthy pregnancies, they face higher risks and trade-offs in health, function, and independence.
objectivesTo review the literature on pregnancy in women with physical disabilities to guide interventions and clinical care guidelines. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Abstracts were reviewed if they were original research on pregnancy involving adult women with physical disabilities. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included, with no restrictions on language or publication year. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL Complete and reference lists of eligible articles. CHARTING
methodsAbstracts were eligible for full-text review if they were (1) original research, (2) in humans, (3) about pregnancy, and (4) involved adult women with physical disabilities. Data were extracted by independent reviewers using Covidence software and assessed with a customized critical appraisal guide.
resultsFive major topics characterized 171 reviewed articles: (1) rates of pregnancy, fertility, and termination or loss; (2) pregnancy complications and infant outcomes; (3) effects of pregnancy on physical function disease activity; (4) maternal care; and (5) social and interpersonal dimensions of pregnancy. Most studies were conducted in the Americas and Europe, and high-income countries used a quantitative design and were assessed to have a moderate risk of bias.
conclusionsThis review highlights the need for future research to (1) build a stronger evidence base for tailored maternal care, (2) examine disability discrimination's impact on pregnancy outcomes, (3) develop interventions to reduce disability-related inequities, and (4) improve disability competence among maternal care providers.
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.