-
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2022Pregestational type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 (T2DM) diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are associated with increased rates of adverse maternal and... (Review)
Review
Pregestational type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 (T2DM) diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are associated with increased rates of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adverse outcomes are more common in women with pregestational diabetes compared to GDM; although, conflicting results have been reported. This systematic review aims to summarise and synthesise studies that have compared adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnancies complicated by pregestational diabetes and GDM. Three databases, Pubmed, EBSCOhost and Scopus were searched to identify studies that compared adverse outcomes in pregnancies complicated by pregestational T1DM and T2DM, and GDM. A total of 20 studies met the inclusion criteria and are included in this systematic review. Thirteen pregnancy outcomes including caesarean section, preterm birth, congenital anomalies, pre-eclampsia, neonatal hypoglycaemia, macrosomia, neonatal intensive care unit admission, stillbirth, Apgar score, large for gestational age, induction of labour, respiratory distress syndrome and miscarriages were compared. Findings from this review confirm that pregestational diabetes is associated with more frequent pregnancy complications than GDM. Taken together, this review highlights the risks posed by all types of maternal diabetes and the need to improve care and educate women on the importance of maintaining optimal glycaemic control to mitigate these risks.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth
PubMed: 36078559
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710846 -
Scientific Reports Aug 2021Understanding changes in oral flora during pregnancy, its association to maternal health, and its implications to birth outcomes is essential. We searched PubMed,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Understanding changes in oral flora during pregnancy, its association to maternal health, and its implications to birth outcomes is essential. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library in May 2020 (updated search in April and June 2021), and conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess the followings: (1) oral microflora changes throughout pregnancy, (2) association between oral microorganisms during pregnancy and maternal oral/systemic conditions, and (3) implications of oral microorganisms during pregnancy on birth outcomes. From 3983 records, 78 studies were included for qualitative assessment, and 13 studies were included in meta-analysis. The oral microflora remains relatively stable during pregnancy; however, pregnancy was associated with distinct composition/abundance of oral microorganisms when compared to postpartum/non-pregnant status. Oral microflora during pregnancy appears to be influenced by oral and systemic conditions (e.g. gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-eclampsia, etc.). Prenatal dental care reduced the carriage of oral pathogens (e.g. Streptococcus mutans). The Porphyromonas gingivalis in subgingival plaque was more abundant in women with preterm birth. Given the results from meta-analyses were inconclusive since limited studies reported outcomes on the same measuring scale, more future studies are needed to elucidate the association between pregnancy oral microbiota and maternal oral/systemic health and birth outcomes.
Topics: Female; Humans; Microbiota; Mouth; Periodontal Diseases; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Publication Bias; Risk
PubMed: 34413437
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96495-1 -
Tropical Medicine & International... Jul 2022Given that women of reproductive age in dengue-endemic areas are at risk of infection, it is necessary to determine whether dengue virus (DENV) infection during... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Given that women of reproductive age in dengue-endemic areas are at risk of infection, it is necessary to determine whether dengue virus (DENV) infection during pregnancy is associated with adverse outcomes. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the consequences of DENV infection in pregnancy on various maternal and foetal-neonatal outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase till December 2021. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios were calculated to report overall effect size using random effect models. The pooled prevalence was computed using the random effect model. All statistical analyses were performed on MedCalc Software.
RESULT
We obtained data from 36 studies involving 39,632 DENV-infected pregnant women. DENV infection in pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of maternal mortality (OR = 4.14 [95% CI, 1.17-14.73]), stillbirth (OR = 2.71 [95% CI, 1.44-5.10]), and neonatal deaths (OR = 3.03 [95% CI, 1.17-7.83]) compared with pregnant women without DENV infection. There was no significant statistical association established between maternal DENV infection and the outcomes of preterm birth, maternal bleeding, low birth weight in neonates, and risk of miscarriage. Pooled prevalences were 14.9% for dengue shock syndrome, 14% for preterm birth, 13.8% for maternal bleeding, 10.1% for low birth weight, 6% for miscarriages, and 5.6% for stillbirth.
CONCLUSION
DENV infection in pregnant women may be associated with adverse outcomes such as maternal mortality, stillbirth, and neonatal mortality. Hence, pregnant women should be considered an at-risk population for dengue management programmes.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Dengue; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant Mortality; Infant, Newborn; Maternal Mortality; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Stillbirth
PubMed: 35689528
DOI: 10.1111/tmi.13783 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Jun 2021To estimate the risk of maternal and neonatal sepsis associated with chorioamnionitis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the risk of maternal and neonatal sepsis associated with chorioamnionitis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, BIOSIS, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for full-text articles in English from inception until May 11, 2020.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
We screened 1,251 studies. Randomized controlled trials, case-control, or cohort studies quantifying a relationship between chorioamnionitis and sepsis in mothers (postpartum) or neonates born at greater than 22 weeks of gestation were eligible. Studies were grouped for meta-analyses according to exposures of histologic or clinical chorioamnionitis and outcomes of maternal or neonatal sepsis.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
One hundred three studies were included, and 55 met criteria for meta-analysis (39 studies of preterm neonates, 10 studies of general populations of preterm and term neonates, and six studies of late preterm and term neonates). Study details and quantitative data were abstracted. Random-effects models were used to generate pooled odds ratios (ORs); most studies only reported unadjusted results. Histologic chorioamnionitis was associated with confirmed and any early-onset neonatal sepsis (unadjusted pooled ORs 4.42 [95% CI 2.68-7.29] and 5.88 [95% CI 3.68-9.41], respectively). Clinical chorioamnionitis was also associated with confirmed and any early-onset neonatal sepsis (unadjusted pooled ORs 6.82 [95% CI 4.93-9.45] and 3.90 [95% CI 2.74-5.55], respectively). Additionally, histologic and clinical chorioamnionitis were each associated with higher odds of late-onset sepsis in preterm neonates. Confirmed sepsis incidence was 7% (early-onset) and 22% (late-onset) for histologic and 6% (early-onset) and 26% (late-onset) for clinical chorioamnionitis-exposed neonates. Three studies evaluated chorioamnionitis and maternal sepsis and were inconclusive.
CONCLUSION
Both histologic and clinical chorioamnionitis were associated with early- and late-onset sepsis in neonates. Overall, our findings support current guidelines for preventative neonatal care. There was insufficient evidence to determine the association between chorioamnionitis and maternal sepsis.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42020156812.
Topics: Chorioamnionitis; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Incidence; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Sepsis; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Sepsis; Term Birth; Time Factors
PubMed: 33957655
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004377 -
International Journal of Gynaecology... Dec 2022To explore perinatal outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-vaccinated pregnant women compared with unvaccinated counterparts. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To explore perinatal outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-vaccinated pregnant women compared with unvaccinated counterparts.
METHODS
Search was conducted using Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrial.gov, MEDLINE, Embase, OVID, and Cochrane Library as electronic databases. We included observational studies evaluating pregnant women undergoing SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and compared pregnancy and perinatal outcomes with those in unvaccinated women. Categorical variables were assessed using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas for continuous variables, the results were expressed as mean difference with their 95% CI. All analyses were performed by adopting the random effect model of DerSimonian and Laird.
RESULTS
There was no difference in the probability of having a small-for-gestational-age fetus (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85-1.09; P = 0.570), but we observed a reduced probability of a non-reassuring fetal monitoring, a reduced gestational age at delivery, and a reduced probability of premature delivery in vaccinated pregnant women versus unvaccinated ones.
CONCLUSION
The probability of small for gestational age is similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women, and the former also had a slightly reduced rate of premature delivery.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; COVID-19 Vaccines; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Premature Birth; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Fetal Growth Retardation; Pregnancy Outcome
PubMed: 35810414
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.14336 -
JAMA Pediatrics Jun 2022Animal studies have found that antenatal corticosteroids affect many organs across multiple stages of life. However, the long-term outcomes in human children are not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Animal studies have found that antenatal corticosteroids affect many organs across multiple stages of life. However, the long-term outcomes in human children are not well understood.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcomes associated with preterm exposure to antenatal corticosteroids compared with no exposure in all children as well as children with preterm and full-term birth.
DATA SOURCES
Academic databases were searched for articles published from January 1, 2000, to October 29, 2021, including Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar. References of articles were also searched for relevant studies.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cohort studies that assessed long-term neurodevelopmental, psychological, or other outcomes at 1 year or older in those who had preterm exposure to antenatal corticosteroids were included. No language restrictions were set.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data using a piloted data extraction form. Data on study population, pregnancy characteristics, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids, and outcomes were collected. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guidelines were followed, and random-effects models were used for the meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was an author-defined composite of any adverse neurodevelopmental and/or psychological disorder. The secondary outcomes included specific measures of psychological disorders; neurodevelopmental delay; and anthropometric, metabolic, and cardiorespiratory outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 30 studies met the inclusion criteria, and involved more than 1.25 million children who were at least 1 year of age when the outcomes were assessed. Exposure to a single course of antenatal corticosteroids for children with extremely preterm birth was associated with a significant reduction in risk of neurodevelopmental impairment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.57-0.84]; I2 = 0%; low certainty). For children with late-preterm birth, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids was associated with a higher risk of investigation for neurocognitive disorders (n = 25 668 children; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.12 [95% CI, 1.05-1.20]; low certainty). For children with full-term birth, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids was associated with a higher risk of mental or behavioral disorders (n = 641 487 children; aHR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.36-1.60]; low certainty) as well as proven or suspected neurocognitive disorders (n = 529 205 children; aHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.10-1.21]; low certainty).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Results of this study showed that exposure to a single course of antenatal corticosteroids was associated with a significantly lower risk of neurodevelopmental impairment in children with extremely preterm birth but a significantly higher risk of adverse neurocognitive and/or psychological outcomes in children with late-preterm and full-term birth, who made up approximately half of those with exposure to antenatal corticosteroids. The findings suggest a need for caution in administering antenatal corticosteroids.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Female; Humans; Odds Ratio; Pregnancy; Premature Birth
PubMed: 35404395
DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0483 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Jan 2022Biologics are used routinely in pregnant women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but large-scale data reporting adverse pregnancy outcomes among biologic users are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Biologics are used routinely in pregnant women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but large-scale data reporting adverse pregnancy outcomes among biologic users are lacking. We sought to estimate the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with IBD on biologic therapies.
METHODS
We searched major databases from inception to June 2020 for studies estimating the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in IBD when using biologics (anti-tumor necrosis factor [TNF], anti-integrins, and anticytokines). Prevalence and relative risk (RR) were pooled using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Forty-eight studies were included in the meta-analysis comprising 6963 patients. Biologic therapy in IBD pregnancies was associated with a pooled prevalence of 8% (95% CI, 6%-10%; I = 87.4%) for early pregnancy loss, 9% (95% CI, 7%-11%; I = 89.9%) for preterm birth, 0% (95% CI, 0%-0%; I = 0%) for stillbirth, 8% (95% CI, 5%-10%; I = 87.0%) for low birth weight, and 1% (95% CI, 1%-2%; I = 78.3%) for congenital malformations. These rates are comparable with those published in the general population. In subgroup analyses of a small number of studies, the prevalence of early pregnancy loss and preterm birth were higher in vedolizumab vs anti-TNF users. Meta-regression did not show an association of disease activity or concomitant thiopurine on adverse outcomes. Continued TNF inhibitor use during the third trimester was not associated with risk of preterm birth (RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.77-2.60; I = 0%), low birth weight (RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.80-2.18; I = 0%), or congenital malformations (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.47-3.49; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
Adverse pregnancy outcomes among pregnant IBD women using biologics are comparable with that of the general population. PROSPERO protocol #CRD42019135721.
Topics: Biological Products; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors
PubMed: 32931960
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.09.021 -
JAMA Nov 2022Unintended pregnancy is common in the US and is associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes; however, estimates of these associations specific to current... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Unintended pregnancy is common in the US and is associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes; however, estimates of these associations specific to current US populations are lacking.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate associations of unintended pregnancy with maternal and infant health outcomes during pregnancy and post partum with studies relevant to current clinical practice and public health in the US.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and MEDLINE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 15, 2022) and manual review of reference lists.
STUDY SELECTION
Epidemiologic studies relevant to US populations that compared key maternal and infant health outcomes for unintended vs intended pregnancies and met prespecified eligibility criteria were included after investigators' independent dual review of abstracts and full-text articles.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Investigators abstracted data from publications on study methods, participant characteristics, settings, pregnancy intention, comparators, confounders, and outcomes; data were validated by a second investigator. Risk of bias was independently dual rated by investigators using criteria developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Results of studies controlling for confounders were combined by using a profile likelihood random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prenatal depression, postpartum depression, maternal experience of interpersonal violence, preterm birth, and infant low birth weight.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies (N = 524 522 participants) were included (14 cohort studies rated good or fair quality; 22 cross-sectional studies); 12 studies used large population-based data sources. Compared with intended pregnancy, unintended pregnancy was significantly associated with higher odds of depression during pregnancy (23.3% vs 13.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.59 [95% CI, 1.35-1.92]; I2 = 85.0%; 15 studies [n = 41 054]) and post partum (15.7% vs 9.6%; aOR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.40-1.70]; I2 = 7.1%; 10 studies [n = 82 673]), interpersonal violence (14.6% vs 5.5%; aOR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.41-2.91]; I2 = 64.1%; 5 studies [n = 42 306]), preterm birth (9.4% vs 7.7%; aOR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.12-1.31]; I2 = 1.7%; 10 studies [n = 94 351]), and infant low birth weight (7.3% vs 5.2%; aOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.21]; I2 = 0.0%; 8 studies [n = 87 547]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses based on controlling for history of depression for prenatal and postpartum depression and on study design and definition of unintended pregnancy for relevant outcomes. Studies provided limited sociodemographic data and measurement of confounders and outcomes varied.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic observational studies relevant to US populations, unintended pregnancy, compared with intended pregnancy, was significantly associated with adverse maternal and infant outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020192981.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Birth Weight; Cross-Sectional Studies; Depression, Postpartum; Infant Health; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Observational Studies as Topic; Pregnancy, Unplanned; Premature Birth; Pregnancy Outcome; Maternal Health; United States; Violence; Pregnancy Complications
PubMed: 36318133
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.19097 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Sep 2022To assess the efficacy and safety of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Does vaginal progesterone prevent recurrent preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth? Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy and safety of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of spontaneous preterm birth.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to February 28, 2022), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials that compared vaginal progesterone to placebo or no treatment in asymptomatic women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth.
METHODS
The primary outcomes were preterm birth <37 and <34 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes included adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We assessed the risk of bias in the included studies, heterogeneity (I test), small-study effects, publication bias, and quality of evidence; performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses; and calculated 95% prediction intervals and adjusted relative risks.
RESULTS
Ten studies (2958 women) met the inclusion criteria: 7 with a sample size <150 (small studies) and 3 with a sample size >600 (large studies). Among the 7 small studies, 4 were at high risk of bias, 2 were at some concerns of bias, and only 1 was at low risk of bias. All the large studies were at low risk of bias. Vaginal progesterone significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.81; I=75%; 95% prediction interval, 0.31-1.32; very low-quality evidence) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.92; I=66%; 95% prediction interval, 0.23-1.68; very low-quality evidence), and the risk of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.85; I=67%; 95% prediction interval, 0.16-1.79; low-quality evidence). There were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and the placebo or no treatment groups in other adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes. Subgroup analyses revealed that vaginal progesterone decreased the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.55; I=0%) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.49; I=0%) in the small but not in the large studies (relative risk, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.09; I=0% for preterm birth <37 weeks; and relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.13; I=0% for preterm birth <34 weeks). Sensitivity analyses restricted to studies at low risk of bias indicated that vaginal progesterone did not reduce the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.09) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.15). There was clear evidence of substantial small-study effects in the meta-analyses of preterm birth <37 and <34 weeks of gestation because of funnel plot asymmetry and the marked differences in the pooled relative risks obtained from fixed-effect and random-effects models. The adjustment for small-study effects resulted in a markedly reduced and nonsignificant effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.10) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.42).
CONCLUSION
There is no convincing evidence supporting the use of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth or to improve perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of spontaneous preterm birth.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Progesterone; Vagina
PubMed: 35460628
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.04.023 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Nov 2020To assess whether exposure to high temperatures in pregnancy is associated with increased risk for preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess whether exposure to high temperatures in pregnancy is associated with increased risk for preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth.
DESIGN
Systematic review and random effects meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline and Web of Science searched up to September 2018, updated in August 2019.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Clinical studies on associations between high environmental temperatures, and preterm birth, birth weight, and stillbirths.
RESULTS
14 880 records and 175 full text articles were screened. 70 studies were included, set in 27 countries, seven of which were countries with low or middle income. In 40 of 47 studies, preterm births were more common at higher than lower temperatures. Exposures were classified as heatwaves, 1°C increments, and temperature threshold cutoff points. In random effects meta-analysis, odds of a preterm birth rose 1.05-fold (95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.07) per 1°C increase in temperature and 1.16-fold (1.10 to 1.23) during heatwaves. Higher temperature was associated with reduced birth weight in 18 of 28 studies, with considerable statistical heterogeneity. Eight studies on stillbirths all showed associations between temperature and stillbirth, with stillbirths increasing 1.05-fold (1.01 to 1.08) per 1°C rise in temperature. Associations between temperature and outcomes were largest among women in lower socioeconomic groups and at age extremes. The multiple temperature metrics and lag analyses limited comparison between studies and settings.
CONCLUSIONS
Although summary effect sizes are relatively small, heat exposures are common and the outcomes are important determinants of population health. Linkages between socioeconomic status and study outcomes suggest that risks might be largest in low and middle income countries. Temperature rises with global warming could have major implications for child health.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD 42019140136 and CRD 42018118113.
Topics: Female; Hot Temperature; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Risk Factors; Stillbirth
PubMed: 33148618
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m3811