ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2026
A 2 year retrospective study of vegan patients and their pregnancy outcomes in a tertiary level Irish hospital.
Article in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2026. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRecent previous studies have revealed outcomes of higher risk of low birth weight, small for gestational age, and pre-eclampsia for vegan pregnant women compared to other diets. This review examined if patients with vegan diet in our tertiary hospital had similar outcomes.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted for 2022-2024 examining the factors of those who ate an unrestricted diet versus vegan diet (10 270 vs 68 women). Data included maternal demographics, clinical factors and pregnancy outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 29.
resultsVegans demonstrated a lower body mass index (BMI) than those with an unrestricted diet (P < 0.05). There was no difference in reported anemia in vegans versus those with unrestricted diets (17.6% vs 16.1%, P = 0.73) and no significant risk for requiring a blood transfusion either (2.9% vs 3.4%, P = 0.84), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the outcomes of those with a vegan versus unrestricted diet in median birth weight (3390 vs 3410 g, P = 0.77) or rate of premature delivery <37 weeks (7.4% vs 9.5%, P = 0.55). There was also no statistically significant difference for developing gestational diabetes (8.8% vs 9.9%, P = 0.77), or gestational hypertension (0% vs 3.5%, P = 0.12) for vegans versus unrestricted diets, respectively.
conclusionThe outcome in pregnancy for women with vegan and unrestricted diets was equivalent in our cohort. There is limited research on the consequences of vegan diets in pregnancy and further observational longitudinal studies are required for more robust data. Socioeconomic factors should be taken into consideration.
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.