Study question What is the current obstetric-perinatal and neonatal outcome of infected pregnant women and their newborns during the COVID-19 pandemic? Summary answer Miscarriage rates were What is known already A considerable number of systematic reviews, with substantial heterogeneity regarding their methods and included populations, on the impact of COVID-19 on infected pregnant women and their neonates, has emerged. Study design, size, duration Three bibliographical databases were searched (last search: September 10, 2020). Quality assessment was performed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. Primary outcomes included mode of delivery, preterm delivery/labor, premature rupture of membranes (PROM/pPROM) and abortions/miscarriages. Outcomes were mainly presented as ranges. A separate analysis, including only moderate and high-quality systematic reviews, was also conducted. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020214447); Participants/materials, setting, methods The search strategy followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guideline. Keywords employed were (COVID-19 OR SARS-CoV-2 OR “Coronavirus disease 2019”) AND (“Neonatal outcom*” OR “Neonatal characteristic*” OR “Maternal outcom*” OR “maternal characteristic*” OR “pregnancy outcom*” OR “vertical transmission”). All retrieved studies were imported into the Rayyan QCRI and duplicated articles were removed. A snow-ball procedure was also implemented by hand-searching the reference lists of included systematic reviews for additional sources. Main results and the role of chance Thirty-nine reviews were analyzed. Twelve reviews (30.8%) were found to be of “very low quality”, 11 of “low quality”, 13 (33.3%) of “moderate”, and three (7.7%) of “high quality”. Ten articles dealt with miscarriages. One review integrated them into pregnancy terminations (1.4% (4/295)), one into intrauterine fetal deaths (1(3%)), while another one described them as “spontaneous abortions” (0.8% (3/385)). Taking into account reviews, which calculated these rates for their entire included population, miscarriage rates were Limitations, reasons for caution Results are presented in a narrative way using ranges as the primary mean of quantification. We also included studies with both RT-PCR positive women and women with suspected infection based on their clinical and imaging manifestations, whereas, if excluding them, we might have missed a considerable source of information. Wider implications of the findings In conclusion, a rapid increase of CS was observed, especially at the beginning of the pandemic, most likely due to lack of knowledge and robust recommendations. Preterm birth rates were elevated, with iatrogenic reasons potentially involved. Even though neonatal infections were rare, the probability of vertical transmission cannot be eliminated. Trial registration number not applicable’