Search

Objectives: To estimate the association between chronic hypertension and perinatal mortality and to evaluate the extent to which risks are impacted by preterm delivery. Design: Cross‐sectional analysis. Setting: United States, 2015–18. Population: Singleton births (20–44 weeks of gestation). Exposure: Chronic hypertension, defined as elevated blood pressure diagnosed before pregnancy or recognised before 20 weeks of gestation. Main outcomes and measures: We derived the risk of perinatal mortality in relation to chronic hypertension from Poisson models, adjusted for confounders. The impacts of misclassification and unmeasured confounding were assessed. Causal mediation analysis was performed to quantify the impact of preterm delivery on the association. Results: Of the 15 090 678 singleton births, perinatal mortality rates were 22.5 and 8.2 per 1000 births in chronic hypertensive and normotensive pregnancies, respectively (adjusted risk ratio 2.05, 95% CI 2.00–2.10). Corrections for exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding biases substantially increased the risk estimate. Although causal mediation analysis revealed that most of the association of chronic hypertension on perinatal mortality was mediated through preterm delivery, the perinatal mortality rates were highest at early term, term and late term gestations, suggesting that a planned early term delivery at 37–386/7 weeks may optimally balance risk in these pregnancies. Additionally, 87% (95% CI 84–90%) of perinatal deaths could be eliminated if preterm deliveries, as a result of chronic hypertension, were preventable. Conclusions: Chronic hypertension is associated with increased risk for perinatal mortality. Planned early term delivery and targeting modifiable risk factors for chronic hypertension may reduce perinatal mortality rates. Maternal chronic hypertension is associated with increased risk for perinatal mortality, largely driven by preterm birth. Maternal chronic hypertension is associated with increased risk for perinatal mortality, largely driven by preterm birth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The obese parturient is at increased risk for numerous postoperative complications, including surgical-site infections (SSI). Several promising strategies have emerged to reduce the risk of wound complications, including appropriately dosed antibiotics, antiseptic vaginal preparations and prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT). [Extracted from the article]

Objective: To quantify the uptake rates of Carrier Screening (CS) in consanguineous couples and compare this rate to that of non-consanguineous couples., Methods: We performed a matched case control study of 82 consanguineous couples seen at Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical school who were offered carrier screening between January 1, 2012 and October 10, 2022. We then matched each consanguineous female patient to a non-consanguineous female control patient who was also offered CS at the time of their genetic counseling appointment. A 2 × 2 contingency table analysis was used to compare rates of acceptance and declination between the consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups., Results: The overall acceptance rate among consanguineous couples was 82.9%, whereas the overall acceptance rate among non-consanguineous couples was 56.1%. After statistical analysis, consanguineous couples were significantly more likely to accept CS as compared to non-consanguineous couples (OR = 3.801, 95% CI; p < 0.0001). We also report the carrier couple rates and individual carrier statistics between these two groups., Conclusion: This study supports the idea that consanguineous couples are more likely to pursue CS and have a higher carrier couple yield., (© 2024 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Reports of high and rising maternal mortality ratios (MMR) in the United States have caused serious concern. We examined spatiotemporal patterns in cause-specific MMRs, in order to obtain insights into the cause for the increase., Methods: The study included all maternal deaths recorded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1999 to 2021. Changes in overall and cause-specific MMRs were quantified nationally; in low-vs high-MMR states (i.e., MMRs <20 vs ≥26 per 100,000 live births in 2018-2021); and in California vs Texas (populous states with low vs high MMRs). Cause-specific MMRs included those due to unambiguous causes (e.g., selected obstetric causes such as pre-eclampsia/eclampsia) and less-specific/potentially incidental causes (e.g., "other specified pregnancy-related conditions", chronic hypertension, and malignant neoplasms)., Findings: MMRs increased from 9.60 (n = 1543) in 1999-2002 to 23.5 (n = 3478) per 100,000 live births in 2018-2021. The temporal increase in MMRs was smaller in low-MMR states (from 7.82 to 14.1 per 100,000 live births) compared with high-MMR states (from 11.1 to 31.4 per 100,000 live births). MMRs due to selected obstetric causes decreased to a similar extent in low-vs high-MMR states, whereas the increase in MMRs from less-specific/potentially incidental causes was smaller in low- vs high-MMR states (MMR ratio (RR) 5.57, 95% CI 4.28, 7.25 vs 7.07, 95% CI 5.91, 8.46), and in California vs Texas (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.03, 2.69 vs 10.8, 95% CI 6.55, 17.7). The change in malignant neoplasm-associated MMRs was smaller in California vs Texas (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.08, 19.3 vs 91.2, 95% CI 89.2, 94.8). MMRs from less-specific/potentially incidental causes increased in all race/ethnicity groups., Interpretation: Spatiotemporal patterns of cause-specific MMRs, including similar reductions in unambiguous obstetric causes of death and variable increases in less-specific/potentially incidental causes, suggest misclassified maternal deaths and overestimated maternal mortality in some US states., Funding: This work received no funding., Competing Interests: KSJ is supported by an Investigator award from the BC Children's Hospital Research Institute. AB is supported by a Junior 1 Research Scholar Award from the Fonds de recherche du Québec–Santé. SS and SJ are funded from a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CVA is supported, in part, by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01-HL150065) and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R01-ES033190), National Institutes of Health., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: National Vital Statistics System reports show that maternal mortality rates in the United States have nearly doubled, from 17.4 in 2018 to 32.9 per 100,000 live births in 2021. However, these high and rising rates could reflect issues unrelated to obstetrical factors, such as changes in maternal medical conditions or maternal mortality surveillance (eg, due to introduction of the pregnancy checkbox)., Objective: This study aimed to assess if the high and rising rates of maternal mortality in the United States reflect changes in obstetrical factors, maternal medical conditions, or maternal mortality surveillance., Study Design: The study was based on all deaths in the United States from 1999 to 2021. Maternal deaths were identified using the following 2 approaches: (1) per National Vital Statistics System methodology, as deaths in pregnancy or in the postpartum period, including deaths identified solely because of a positive pregnancy checkbox, and (2) under an alternative formulation, as deaths in pregnancy or in the postpartum period, with at least 1 mention of pregnancy among the multiple causes of death on the death certificate. The frequencies of major cause-of-death categories among deaths of female patients aged 15 to 44 years, maternal deaths, deaths due to obstetrical causes (ie, direct obstetrical deaths), and deaths due to maternal medical conditions aggravated by pregnancy or its management (ie, indirect obstetrical deaths) were quantified., Results: Maternal deaths, per National Vital Statistics System methodology, increased by 144% (95% confidence interval, 130-159) from 9.65 in 1999-2002 (n=1550) to 23.6 per 100,000 live births in 2018-2021 (n=3489), with increases occurring among all race and ethnicity groups. Direct obstetrical deaths increased from 8.41 in 1999-2002 to 14.1 per 100,000 live births in 2018-2021, whereas indirect obstetrical deaths increased from 1.24 to 9.41 per 100,000 live births: 38% of direct obstetrical deaths and 87% of indirect obstetrical deaths in 2018-2021 were identified because of a positive pregnancy checkbox. The pregnancy checkbox was associated with increases in less specific and incidental causes of death. For example, maternal deaths with malignant neoplasms listed as a multiple cause of death increased 46-fold from 0.03 in 1999-2002 to 1.42 per 100,000 live births in 2018-2021. Under the alternative formulation, the maternal mortality rate was 10.2 in 1999-2002 and 10.4 per 100,000 live births in 2018-2021; deaths from direct obstetrical causes decreased from 7.05 to 5.82 per 100,000 live births. Deaths due to preeclampsia, eclampsia, postpartum hemorrhage, puerperal sepsis, venous complications, and embolism decreased, whereas deaths due to adherent placenta, renal and unspecified causes, cardiomyopathy, and preexisting hypertension increased. Maternal mortality increased among non-Hispanic White women and decreased among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic women. However, rates were disproportionately higher among non-Hispanic Black women, with large disparities evident in several causes of death (eg, cardiomyopathy)., Conclusion: The high and rising rates of maternal mortality in the United States are a consequence of changes in maternal mortality surveillance, with reliance on the pregnancy checkbox leading to an increase in misclassified maternal deaths. Identifying maternal deaths by requiring mention of pregnancy among the multiple causes of death shows lower, stable maternal mortality rates and declines in maternal deaths from direct obstetrical causes., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: There is uncertainty regarding the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on population rates of stillbirth. We quantified pandemic-associated changes in stillbirth rates in Canada and the United States., Methods: We carried out a retrospective study that included all live births and stillbirths in Canada and the United States from 2015 to 2020. The primary analysis was based on all stillbirths and live births at ≥20 weeks gestation. Stillbirth rates were analyzed by month, with March 2020 considered to be the month of pandemic onset. Interrupted time series analyses were used to determine pandemic effects., Results: The study population included 18 475 stillbirths and 2 244 240 live births in Canada and 134 883 stillbirths and 22 963 356 live births in the United States (8.2 and 5.8 stillbirths per 1000 total births, respectively). In Canada, pandemic onset was associated with an increase in stillbirths at ≥20 weeks gestation of 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-1.46) per 1000 total births and an increase in stillbirths at ≥28 weeks gestation of 0.35 (95% CI 0.16-0.54) per 1000 total births. In the United States, pandemic onset was associated with an increase in stillbirths at ≥20 weeks gestation of 0.48 (95% CI 0.22-0.75) per 1000 total births and an increase in stillbirths at ≥28 weeks gestation of 0.22 (95% CI 0.12-0.32) per 1000 total births. The increase in stillbirths at pandemic onset returned to pre-pandemic levels in subsequent months., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic's onset was associated with a transitory increase in stillbirth rates in Canada and the United States., (Copyright © 2023 The Author. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Climate change and anthropogenic activity pose severe threats to water availability in drylands. A better understanding of water availability response to these threats could improve our ability to adapt and mitigate climate and anthropogenic effects. Here, we present a Mesic Vegetation Persistence (MVP) workflow that takes every usable image in the Sentinel (10-m) and Landsat (30-m) archives to generate a dense time-series of water availability that is continuously updated as new images become available in Google Earth Engine. MVP takes advantage of the fact that mesic vegetation can be used as a proxy of available water in drylands. Our MVP workflow combines a novel moisture-based index (moisture change index - MCI) with a vegetation index (Modified Chlorophyll Absorption Ratio Vegetation Index (MCARI2)). MCI is the difference in soil moisture condition between an individual pixel's state and the dry and wet reference reflectance in the image, derived using 5th and 95th percentiles of the visible and shortwave infra-red drought index (VSDI). We produced and validated our MVP products across drylands of the western U.S., covering a broad range of elevation, land use, and ecoregions. MVP outperforms NDVI, a commonly-employed index for mesic ecosystem health, in both rangeland and forested ecosystems, and in mesic habitats with particularly high and low vegetation cover. We applied our MVP product at case study sites and found that MVP more accurately characterizes differences in mesic persistence, late-season water availability, and restoration success compared to NDVI. MVP could be applied as an indicator of change in a variety of contexts to provide a greater understanding of how water availability changes as a result of climate and management. Our MVP product for the western U.S. is freely available within a Google Earth Engine Web App, and the MVP workflow is replicable for other dryland regions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reported rates of maternal mortality in the United States have been staggeringly high and increasing, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a chief contributor to such deaths. However, the impact of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) on the short-term risk of cardiovascular death is not well understood., Objectives: To evaluate the association between HDP (chronic hypertension, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, and superimposed preeclampsia) and pregnancy-associated mortality rates (PMR) from all causes, CVD-related causes both at delivery and within 1 year following delivery., Methods: We used the Nationwide Readmissions Database (2010-2018) to examine PMRs for females 15-54 years old. International Classification of Disease 9 and 10 diagnosis codes were used to identify pregnancy-associated deaths due to HDP and CVD. Discrete-time Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for mortality at delivery (0 days) and at <30, <60, <90, <180, and <365 days after delivery in relation to HDP., Results: Of 33,417,736 hospital deliveries, the rate of HDP was 11.0% (n = 3,688,967), and the PMR from CVD was 6.4 per 100,000 delivery hospitalisations (n = 2141). Compared with normotensive patients, HRs for CVD-related PMRs increased with HDP severity, reaching over 58-fold for eclampsia patients. HRs were higher for stroke-related (1.2 to 170.9) than heart disease (HD)-related (0.99 to 39.8) mortality across all HDPs. Except for gestational hypertension, the increased risks of CVD mortality were evident at delivery and persisted 1 year postpartum for all HDPs., Conclusions: HDPs are strong risk factors for pregnancy-associated mortality due to CVD at delivery and within 1 year postpartum; the risks are stronger for stroke than HD-related PMR. While absolute PMRs are low, this study supports the importance of extending postpartum care beyond the traditional 42-day postpartum visit for people whose pregnancies are complicated by hypertension., (© 2024 The Authors. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Preeclampsia is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD, including heart disease and stroke) along the life course. However, whether exposure to chronic hypertension in pregnancy, in the absence of preeclampsia, is implicated in CVD risk during the immediate postpartum period remains poorly understood. Our objective was to estimate the risk of readmission for CVD complications within the calendar year after delivery for people with chronic hypertension., Methods: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Readmission Database (2010-2018) was used to conduct a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 15-54 years. International Classification of Diseases codes were used to identify patients with chronic hypertension and postpartum readmission for CVD complications within 1 year of delivery. People with CVD diagnosed during pregnancy or delivery admission, multiple births, or preeclampsia or eclampsia were excluded. Excess rates of CVD readmission among patients with and without chronic hypertension were estimated. Associations between chronic hypertension and CVD complications were determined from Cox proportional hazards regression models., Results: Of 27,395,346 delivery hospitalizations that resulted in singleton births, 2.0% of individuals had chronic hypertension (n=544,639). The CVD hospitalization rate among patients with chronic hypertension and normotensive patients was 645 (n=3,791) per 100,000 delivery hospitalizations and 136 (n=37,664) per 100,000 delivery hospitalizations, respectively (rate difference 508, 95% CI 467-549; adjusted hazard ratio 4.11, 95% CI 3.64-4.66). The risk of CVD readmission, in relation to chronic hypertension, persisted for 1 year after delivery., Conclusion: The heightened CVD risk as early as 1 month postpartum in relation to chronic hypertension underscores the need for close monitoring and timely care after delivery to reduce blood pressure and related complications., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To quantify pandemic-related changes in obstetric intervention and perinatal outcomes in the United States., Methods: We carried out a retrospective study of all live births and fetal deaths in the United States, 2015-2021, with data obtained from the natality, fetal death, and linked live birth-infant death files of the National Center for Health Statistics. Analyses were carried out among all singletons; singletons of patients with prepregnancy diabetes, prepregnancy hypertension, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; and twins. Outcomes of interest included preterm birth, preterm labor induction or preterm cesarean delivery, macrosomia, postterm birth, and perinatal death. Interrupted time series analyses were used to estimate changes in the prepandemic period (January 2015-February 2020), at pandemic onset (March 2020), and in the pandemic period (March 2020-December 2021)., Results: The study population included 26,604,392 live births and 155,214 stillbirths. The prepandemic period was characterized by temporal increases in preterm birth and preterm labor induction or cesarean delivery rates and temporal reductions in macrosomia, postterm birth, and perinatal mortality. Pandemic onset was associated with absolute decreases in preterm birth (decrease of 0.322/100 live births, 95% CI 0.506-0.139) and preterm labor induction or cesarean delivery (decrease of 0.190/100 live births, 95% CI 0.334-0.047) and absolute increases in macrosomia (increase of 0.046/100 live births), postterm birth (increase of 0.015/100 live births), and perinatal death (increase of 0.501/1,000 total births, 95% CI 0.220-0.783). These changes were larger in subpopulations at high risk (eg, among singletons of patients with prepregnancy diabetes). Among singletons of patients with prepregnancy diabetes, pandemic onset was associated with a decrease in preterm birth (decrease of 1.634/100 live births) and preterm labor induction or cesarean delivery (decrease of 1.521/100 live births) and increases in macrosomia (increase of 0.328/100 live births) and perinatal death (increase of 9.840/1,000 total births, 95% CI 3.933-15.75). Most changes were reversed in the months after pandemic onset., Conclusion: The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with a transient decrease in obstetric intervention (especially preterm labor induction or cesarean delivery) and a transient increase in perinatal mortality., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure Amelie Boutin reports receiving a Junior I Research Scholar Award from a governmental agency, the Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé. Mohamed A. Bedaiwy disclosed receiving funding from Pfizer, and his institution received funding from Ferring. He also received a grant from CIHR to study the effects of COVID on patients with recurrent pregnancy loss. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Despite the decline in the rate of coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality, it is unknown how the 3 strong and modifiable risk factors - alcohol, smoking, and obesity -have impacted these trends. We examine changes in CHD mortality rates in the United States and estimate the preventable fraction of CHD deaths by eliminating CHD risk factors., Methods: We performed a sequential time-series analysis to examine mortality trends among females and males aged 25 to 84 years in the United States, 1990-2019, with CHD recorded as the underlying cause of death. We also examined mortality rates from chronic ischemic heart disease (IHD), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and atherosclerotic heart disease (AHD). All underlying causes of CHD deaths were classified based on the International Classification of Disease 9th and 10th revisions. We estimated the preventable fraction of CHD deaths attributable to alcohol, smoking, and high body-mass index (BMI) through the Global Burden of Disease., Results: Among females (3,452,043 CHD deaths; mean [standard deviation, SD] age 49.3 [15.7] years), the age-standardized CHD mortality rate declined from 210.5 in 1990 to 66.8 per 100,000 in 2019 (annual change -4.04%, 95% CI -4.05, -4.03; incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.32, 95% CI, 0.41, 0.43). Among males (5,572,629 CHD deaths; mean [SD] age 47.9 [15.1] years), the age-standardized CHD mortality rate declined from 442.4 to 156.7 per 100,000 (annual change -3.74%, 95% CI, -3.75, -3.74; IRR 0.36, 95% CI, 0.35, 0.37). A slowing of the decline in CHD mortality rates among younger cohorts was evident. Correction for unmeasured confounders through a quantitative bias analysis slightly attenuated the decline. Half of all CHD deaths could have been prevented with the elimination of smoking, alcohol, and obesity, including 1,726,022 female and 2,897,767 male CHD deaths between 1990 and 2019., Conclusions: The decline in CHD mortality is slowing among younger cohorts. The complex dynamics of risk factors appear to shape mortality rates, underscoring the importance of targeted strategies to reduce modifiable risk factors that contribute to CHD mortality., Competing Interests: Disclosures None reported., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Whether changes in stroke mortality are affected by age distribution and birth cohorts, and if the decline in stroke mortality exhibits heterogeneity by stroke type, remains uncertain., Methods: We undertook a sequential time series analysis to examine stroke mortality trends in the USA among people aged 18-84 years between 1975 and 2019 (n = 4 332 220). Trends were examined for overall stroke and by ischaemic and haemorrhagic subtypes. Mortality data were extracted from the US death files, and age-sex population data were extracted from US census. Age-standardized stroke mortality rates and incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% confidence interval [CI] were derived from Poisson regression models., Results: Age-standardized stroke mortality declined for females from 87.5 in 1975 to 30.9 per 100 000 in 2019 (IRR 0.27, 95% CI 0.26, 0.27; average annual decline -2.78%, 95% CI -2.79, -2.78). Among males, age-standardized mortality rate declined from 112.1 in 1975 to 38.7 per 100 000 in 2019 (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.26, 0.27; average annual decline -2.80%, 95% CI -2.81, -2.79). Stroke mortality increased sharply with advancing age. Decline in stroke mortality was steeper for ischaemic than haemorrhagic strokes., Conclusions: Stroke mortality rates have substantially declined, more so for ischaemic than haemorrhagic strokes., (© The Author(s) 2022; all rights reserved. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

Background: People with marginalized gender identities, including people with transgender and gender-expansive identities, have been historically excluded from research. Professional societies recommend the use of inclusive language in research, but it is uncertain how many obstetrics and gynecology journals mandate the use of gender-inclusive research practices in their author guidelines., Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the proportion of "inclusive" journals with specific instructions about gender-inclusive research practices in their author submission guidelines; to compare these journals with "noninclusive" journals based on publisher, country of origin, and several metrics of research influence; and to qualitatively evaluate the components of inclusive research in author submission guidelines., Study Design: A cross-sectional study of all obstetrics and gynecology journals in the Journal Citation Reports, a scientometric resource, was conducted in April 2022. Of note, One journal was indexed twice (due to a name change), and only the journal with the 2020 Journal Impact Factor was included. Author submission guidelines were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers to identify inclusive vs noninclusive journals based on whether journals had gender-inclusive research instructions. Journal characteristics, including publisher, country of origin, impact metrics (eg, Journal Impact Factor), normalized metrics (eg, Journal Citation Indicator), and source metrics (eg, number of citable items), were evaluated for all journals. The median (interquartile range) and median difference between inclusive and noninclusive journals with bootstrapped 95% confidence interval were calculated for journals with 2020 Journal Impact Factors. In addition, inclusive research instructions were thematically compared to identify trends., Results: Author submission guidelines were reviewed for all 121 active obstetrics and gynecology journals indexed in the Journal Citation Reports. Overall, 41 journals (33.9%) were inclusive, and 34 journals (41.0%) with 2020 Journal Impact Factors were inclusive. Most inclusive journals were English-language publications and originated in the United States and Europe. In an analysis of journals with 2020 Journal Impact Factors, inclusive journals had a higher median Journal Impact Factor (3.4 [interquartile range, 2.2-4.3] vs 2.5 [interquartile range, 1.9-3.0]; median difference, 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.7) and median 5-year Journal Impact Factor (3.6 [interquartile range, 2.8-4.3] vs 2.6 [interquartile range, 2.1-3.2; median difference, 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-1.6) than noninclusive journals. Inclusive journals had higher normalized metrics, including a median 2020 Journal Citation Indicator (1.1 [interquartile range, 0.7-1.3] vs 0.8 [interquartile range, 0.6-1.0]; median difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.5) and median normalized Eigenfactor (1.4 [interquartile range, 0.7-2.2] vs 0.7 [interquartile range, 0.4-1.5]; median difference, 0.8; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.5) than noninclusive journals. Moreover, inclusive journals had higher source metrics, including more citable items, total items, and Open Access Gold subscriptions, than noninclusive journals. The qualitative analysis of gender-inclusive research instructions revealed that most inclusive journals recommend that researchers use gender-neutral language and provide specific examples of inclusive language., Conclusion: Fewer than half of obstetrics and gynecology journals with 2020 Journal Impact Factors have gender-inclusive research practices in their author submission guidelines. This study underscores the urgent need for most obstetrics and gynecology journals to update their author submission guidelines to include specific instructions about gender-inclusive research practices., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are limited data on postpartum readmissions for depression in the United States (US). Specifically, the extent to which ischaemic placental disease (IPD) during pregnancy predisposes patients to develop postpartum depression remains poorly understood. We investigated whether IPD is associated with postpartum readmission for new-onset depression in the first year after delivery., Methods: In this population-based study, the 2010-2018 Nationwide Readmissions Database was utilised to evaluate rates of postpartum readmission for depression within the calendar year of delivery hospitalisation among patients with and without IPD. IPD was defined as preeclampsia, placental abruption, or small for gestational age (SGA) birth. We expressed associations between IPD and depression readmission based on a confounder-adjusted hazards ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI)., Findings: Of 33.3 million delivery hospitalisations, 3,027,084 (9.1%) had IPD. The total follow-up among those with and without IPD were 17,855,830 and 180,100,532 person-months, respectively, with a median follow-up of 5.8 months for both groups. Rates of depression readmission were 95.7 (n = 17,095) and 37.5 (n = 67,536) per 100,000 readmissions among patients with and without an IPD, respectively (HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 2.32-2.47); this risk was the highest for preeclampsia with severe features (HR, 3.14; 95% CI, 3.00-3.29). Patients had a greater risk of readmission if they had any two forms of IPD (HR, 3.02; 95% CI, 2.75-3.33), and those with a concurrent diagnosis of preeclampsia and abruption posed the highest risk (HR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.71-3.86)., Interpretation: These findings suggested that patients with IPD are at a substantially increased risk of readmission for depression within a year following delivery. This study underscores the need for increased surveillance, improved detection, and faster treatment of depression in this vulnerable population., Funding: This was an unfunded project., Competing Interests: All authors declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Placental abruption is the premature separation of the placenta from its uterine attachment before the delivery of a fetus. The clinical manifestations of abruption typically include vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain with a wide variety of abnormal fetal heart rate patterns. Clinical challenges arise when pregnant people with this condition present with profound vaginal bleeding, necessitating urgent delivery, especially when there is a concern for maternal and fetal compromise and coagulopathy. Abruption occurs in 0.6% to 1.2% of all pregnancies, with nearly half of abruption occurring at term gestations. An exposition of abruption at near-term (defined as the late preterm period from 34 0/7 to 36 6/7 weeks of gestation) and term (defined as ≥37 weeks of gestation) provides unique insights into its direct effects, as risks associated with preterm birth do not impact outcomes. Here, we explore the pathophysiology, epidemiology, and diagnosis of abruption. We discuss the interaction of chronic processes (decidual and uteroplacental vasculopathy) and acute processes (shearing forces applied to the abdomen) that underlie the pathophysiology. Risk factors for abruption and strengths of association are summarized. Sonographic findings of abruption and fetal heart rate tracings are presented. In addition, we propose a management algorithm for acute abruption that incorporates blood loss, vital signs, and urine output, among other factors. Lastly, we discuss blood component therapy, viscoelastic point-of-care testing, disseminated intravascular coagulopathy, and management of abruption complicated by fetal death. The review seeks to provide comprehensive, clinically focused guidance during a gestational age range when neonatal outcomes can often be favorable if rapid and evidence-based care is optimized., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The initial COVID-19 pandemic response-related effects on conceptions following the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART), and on changes in the maternal characteristics of women who conceived during the early vs. pre-pandemic period, have been understudied., Objectives: To examine the effects of ART clinic closures in the United States (US) in March 2020 on the frequency of ART-conceived live births, multiple births and stillbirths; and to describe changes in the characteristics of women who conceived in the early pandemic period., Methods: Population-based cohort study including all births in the US from January 2015 to December 2020 (22,907,688 live births; 134,537 stillbirths). Interrupted time series (ITS) methodology was used to estimate rate ratios (RR) of expected versus observed rates in December 2020 (i.e., among births conceived mainly in March 2020). Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between mothers who conceived in March 2020 versus March 2015-2019., Results: Overall, 1.1% of live births and 1.7% of stillbirths were conceived by ART. ART-conceived live births decreased by 57.0% in December 2020 (observed vs. expected RR 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40, 0.45), and these declines occurred in all subgroups of women. Multiple births also declined in December 2020. Stillbirth rates increased in December 2020 in ART-conceived births (RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.63, 3.92) but remained unchanged in the non-ART group. Maternal characteristics of women who conceived in the early pandemic versus pre-pandemic period differed and included an increased prevalence of pre-pregnancy obesity class 3 and chronic hypertension., Conclusions: The early pandemic closure of ART clinics resulted in a substantial decline in ART-conceived live births and multiple births in December 2020 and an increase in the proportion of stillbirths among ART-conceived births. Women who conceived in the early pandemic period also had an increased prevalence of obesity and chronic hypertension., (© 2022 The Authors. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: This sequential, prospective meta-analysis sought to identify risk factors among pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 for adverse outcomes related to disease severity, maternal morbidities, neonatal mortality and morbidity, and adverse birth outcomes., Data Sources: We prospectively invited study investigators to join the sequential, prospective meta-analysis via professional research networks beginning in March 2020., Study Eligibility Criteria: Eligible studies included those recruiting at least 25 consecutive cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy within a defined catchment area., Methods: We included individual patient data from 21 participating studies. Data quality was assessed, and harmonized variables for risk factors and outcomes were constructed. Duplicate cases were removed. Pooled estimates for the absolute and relative risk of adverse outcomes comparing those with and without each risk factor were generated using a 2-stage meta-analysis., Results: We collected data from 33 countries and territories, including 21,977 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy or postpartum. We found that women with comorbidities (preexisting diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cardiovascular disease) vs those without were at higher risk for COVID-19 severity and adverse pregnancy outcomes (fetal death, preterm birth, low birthweight). Participants with COVID-19 and HIV were 1.74 times (95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.71) more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit. Pregnant women who were underweight before pregnancy were at higher risk of intensive care unit admission (relative risk, 5.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.27-13.44), ventilation (relative risk, 9.36; 95% confidence interval, 3.87-22.63), and pregnancy-related death (relative risk, 14.10; 95% confidence interval, 2.83-70.36). Prepregnancy obesity was also a risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes including intensive care unit admission (relative risk, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-2.60), ventilation (relative risk, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.51), any critical care (relative risk, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.77), and pneumonia (relative risk, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.33). Anemic pregnant women with COVID-19 also had increased risk of intensive care unit admission (relative risk, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.11) and death (relative risk, 2.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-4.81)., Conclusion: We found that pregnant women with comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease were at increased risk for severe COVID-19-related outcomes, maternal morbidities, and adverse birth outcomes. We also identified several less commonly known risk factors, including HIV infection, prepregnancy underweight, and anemia. Although pregnant women are already considered a high-risk population, special priority for prevention and treatment should be given to pregnant women with these additional risk factors., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: To ascertain the rate of unexpected findings on carrier screening (CS) and assess whether implications are disclosed to patients., Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study of subjects who had CS after pre-test counseling from a licensed genetic counselor at a large tertiary care center. We quantified the rate of unexpected finding on CS, defined as manifesting carriers (MCs), genotypes predicting phenotype, and chromosome abnormalities. We determined how often patients were informed of implications. We performed subgroup analyses by type of unexpected finding and calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for carrier testing methodology (genotype) and number of genes tested., Results: A total of 4685 patients had CS over the selected time frame. Of those patients, 412 patients (8.8%) had one unexpected finding and 29 patients (0.6%) had two or more findings. In total, 466 unexpected findings were identified, including 437 MC conditions, 23 genotypes predicting phenotype, and 6 chromosome abnormalities. Patients were informed of the implications for MCs, genotypes predicting phenotype, and chromosome abnormalities in 27.6%, 91.3%, and 100% of cases, respectively. More unexpected findings were detected with sequencing compared to genotyping (OR 2.21 and 95% CI 1.76-2.76) and with ≥200 gene panels compared to <200 gene panels (OR 1.79 and 95% CI 1.47-2.17)., Conclusion: This study highlights that nondisclosure of unexpected findings on CS is common and underscores the need for further research to improve post-test counseling and follow-up., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Despite a growing body of research on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, there is continued controversy given heterogeneity in the quality and design of published studies., Methods: We screened ongoing studies in our sequential, prospective meta-analysis. We pooled individual participant data to estimate the absolute and relative risk (RR) of adverse outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared with confirmed negative pregnancies. We evaluated the risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale., Results: We screened 137 studies and included 12 studies in 12 countries involving 13 136 pregnant women.Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection-as compared with uninfected pregnant women-were at significantly increased risk of maternal mortality (10 studies; n=1490; RR 7.68, 95% CI 1.70 to 34.61); admission to intensive care unit (8 studies; n=6660; RR 3.81, 95% CI 2.03 to 7.17); receiving mechanical ventilation (7 studies; n=4887; RR 15.23, 95% CI 4.32 to 53.71); receiving any critical care (7 studies; n=4735; RR 5.48, 95% CI 2.57 to 11.72); and being diagnosed with pneumonia (6 studies; n=4573; RR 23.46, 95% CI 3.03 to 181.39) and thromboembolic disease (8 studies; n=5146; RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 27.12).Neonates born to women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal care unit after birth (7 studies; n=7637; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.08); be born preterm (7 studies; n=6233; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.29) or moderately preterm (7 studies; n=6071; RR 2.92, 95% CI 1.88 to 4.54); and to be born low birth weight (12 studies; n=11 930; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Infection was not linked to stillbirth. Studies were generally at low or moderate risk of bias., Conclusions: This analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 infection at any time during pregnancy increases the risk of maternal death, severe maternal morbidities and neonatal morbidity, but not stillbirth or intrauterine growth restriction. As more data become available, we will update these findings per the published protocol., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CW declares a relationship with Ferring Pharmaceuticals COVID-19 Investigational Grant and NHMRC Fellowship (salary support). AP declares the following research grants to her institution: ‘H2020-Grant—Consortium member of Innovative medicine initiative call 13 topic 9 «ConcePTION», Efficacy and safety studies on Medicines EMA/2017/09/PE/11, Lot 4, WP 2 lead, Safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines in the EU—Reopening of competition no. 20 under a framework contract following procurement procedure EMA/2017/09/PE (Lot 3) (Euro 110,000), Federal Office of Public Health (207,000 CHF)’. EM declares a relationship with the National Institute for Health Research (project grant for PAN COVID study). DM declares a relationship with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (payments to institution only), Public Health Agency of Canada (payments to institution only), BC Women’s Foundation (payments to institution only) and is a member of the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force sponsored by the Canadian government. TDM declares a relationship with Pfizer (site principal investigator for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy study, money paid to institution and member of Medical Advisory Board for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy study, money paid to TDM), NICHD (subcommittee chair for the NICHD Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Gestational Research Assessments of COVID-19 (GRAVID) study) and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (board member). EL declares a relationship with the US NIH (paid institution) and is an employee of AbbVie, but was employed at the University of Washington at the time of the study. KK declares a relationship with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. VJF declares a relationship with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (payments to institution), Yellow Chair Foundation (payments to institution), Robert Woods Johnson Foundation (payments to institution), CDC Foundation, California Health Care Foundation (payments to institution), Tara Health Foundation (payments to institution), UCSF Women’s Health Center of Excellence (payments to institution) and California Department of Health Care Services (payments made to institution). JS-B declares a relationship with the Ferring Pharmaceuticals, which gave a grant ($10 000) for the expenses of RECOGEST trial and is a part of the Columbian Federation of Perinatology. YA declares a relationship with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (payments made to institution), CDC Foundation (payments made to institution), Robert Woods Johnson Foundation (payments made to institution) and UCLA Dean’s Office COVID-19 research (payments made to institution). RC declares a relationship with the NIH HD36801 (MFMU Network DCC). MCN declares a relationship with the BMGF (project grant made to institution), EDCTP, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Pfizer (research grants made to institution), Sanofi Pasteur (payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events) and Sanofi Pasteur and Pfizer (payment for expert testimony). ESM declares a relationship with Pfizer (site principal investigator for phase 2/3 RCT of COVID vaccine during pregnancy). OS declares a relationship with the NordForsk Funding (Nordic research funding grant number: 105545), the Swedish Medical Products Agency (funding for reports on COVID-19 vaccines and pregnancy) and Karolinska Institutet (funding for COVID research and pregnancy: 2020-01567). EG declares a relationship with the Stavros Niarchos Foundation, Santander Foundation and ‘La Caixa’ Foundation (payments made to institution). SAM declares a relationship with BMGF (funded study in South Africa)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: There is an association between recreational marijuana use in pregnancy and legalization. As more states legalize marijuana, its use in pregnancy may increase. The objective of this study was to evaluate pregnant women's knowledge and opinions about marijuana use, potential risks, and legalization., Methods: A cross-sectional survey of pregnant women at a regional perinatal center in New Jersey was performed from January-December 2019. Pregnant subjects were invited to complete a voluntary, anonymous 23-question survey about marijuana use in pregnancy, potential risks, and legalization. Subjects were excluded if they could not read in English or Spanish. Survey questions were based on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree). Likelihood of agreeing or disagreeing with potential risks, with neutral responses as the reference, were estimated based on the relative risk (RR) (95% confidence interval [CI]). Associations were examined with prior tobacco/marijuana use and education level., Results: During the study period, approximately 1133 consecutive patients were approached and 843 completed the study (74.4% response rate). The majority of participants were English-speaking, college educated, and employed. 204 (25.2%) reported prior marijuana use and 36 (4.5%) reported marijuana use during pregnancy. Overall, pregnant women had poor knowledge about potential risks of marijuana use in pregnancy. Although 234 (29.0%) patients were opposed to legalization, more than 90% of pregnant subjects indicated that they would be more likely to use marijuana in pregnancy if it were legalized. Associations of marijuana risks by prior tobacco use showed that nonsmokers had more awareness about risks. Nonsmokers had higher likelihood of agreeing that marijuana use may be harmful to a pregnancy (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.12-1.76), may hurt the growth of a baby (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.07-1.74), may cause preterm birth (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.00-1.40), and may hurt a child's ability to learn (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.95-1.51). Similar trends were observed for subjects who reported no prior marijuana use and for subjects with more than high school education., Conclusions: The majority of surveyed pregnant women demonstrated poor knowledge about the possible risks of marijuana in pregnancy and indicated that they would be more likely to use marijuana in pregnancy if it were legalized. As the use of marijuana increases, providers should focus on educating their patients about potential risks associated with marijuana use in pregnancy while additional research is needed to clarify associated risks.

Objectives: To apply scientometric methodology to characterize influential articles in the Journal of Perinatal Medicine (JPM)., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of all JPM articles indexed in Clarivate Web of Science (WOS), NIH Open Citation Collection, and Altmetric Explorer databases (1973-2022). We identified articles cited ≥100 times in WOS and articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios (RCR, a metric of influence based on citations) and highest Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS, a metric of engagement with social media and public platforms). We performed descriptive analysis to characterize influential articles based on citation rates vs. highest AAS, and quantile regression with bootstrapping to estimate the median differences (95% confidence intervals)., Results: We identified 4095 JPM articles that were indexed in the WOS, of which 3,959 (96.7%) had RCRs and 939 (22.9%) had AASs. The study cohort included 34 articles cited ≥100 times and the 34 top-RCR and 34 top-AAS articles, representing 83 unique articles. These influential articles had median 67 citations (IQR 17-114), median RCR 3.4 (IQR 1.7-5.0), and median AAS 14 (IQR 3-28). The majority were observational studies and reviews. Compared to top-AAS articles, top-cited articles had higher median citations (117 [IQR 111-147] vs. 13 [IQR 5-62]; median difference 104.0, 95% CI 86.6-121.4) and citations per year (7.3 [IQR 4.9-10.6] vs. 2.3 [0.7-4.6]; median difference 5.5 [95% CI 3.1-7.9]). Results were similar for top-RCR vs. top-AAS articles., Conclusions: We identified influential articles during 50 years of JPM, providing insight into the impact of the journal and providing a template for future studies of academic journals., (© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.)

Background: Given slowing secular declines and persistent racial disparities, stillbirth remains a major health burden in the US. We investigate changes in stillbirth rates overall and for Black and White women, and determine how maternal age, delivery year (period), and birth year (cohort) have shaped trends., Methods: We designed a sequential time-series analysis utilising the 1980 to 2020 US vital records data of live births and stillbirths at ≥24 weeks gestation. Stillbirth rates overall and among Black and White women were examined. We undertook an age-period-cohort analysis to evaluate temporal changes in stillbirth trends., Findings: Of 157,192,032 live births and 710,832 stillbirths between 1980 and 2020, stillbirth rates per 1000 births declined from 10.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.5, 10.7) in 1980 to 5.8 (95% CI 5.7, 5.8) in 2020. Stillbirth rates declined from 9.2 to 5.0 per 1000 births among White women (rate ratio [RR] 0.54, 95% CI 0.53, 0.55), and from 17.4 to 10.1 per 1000 births among Black women (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.55, 0.59). Black women experienced persistent two-fold higher rates compared to White women (2.01, 95% CI 1.97, 2.05 in 2020). Stillbirth rates declined until 2005, increased from 2005 to the mid-2010s and plateaued thereafter. Strong cohort effects contributed to declining rates in earlier cohorts (1930-1955) and increasing rates among women born after 1980., Interpretation: Age, period, and birth cohorts greatly influenced US stillbirth rates over the last forty years. The decline in stillbirth rate was evident between 1980 and 2005, however subsequent declines have been minimal, reflecting no further gains for cohorts of women born in 1955-1980 and stagnation of period effects starting in 2005. A significant racial disparity persisted with a two-fold excess in stillbirth rates for Black compared to White women, underscoring the need for targeted health and social policies to address disparities., Funding: None., Competing Interests: All authors declare: no support from any organization for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Background: Whether research engagement on social media and other public platforms results in increased citations in obstetrics and gynecology remains uncertain. The Altmetric Attention Score is a metric of research influence based on mentions on social media and public platforms, such as newsfeeds and Wikipedia. The correlation between Altmetric Attention Scores, absolute citation rates, and the Relative Citation Ratio (a novel metric of research engagement also based on citation rates) in obstetrics and gynecology research is uncertain., Objective: To evaluate the correlation between Altmetric Attention Score, absolute citation rate, and Relative Citation Ratio for articles published in obstetrics and gynecology journals from 2004 to 2019. Our second objective was to identify, characterize, and compare the 100 articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores, the 100 most-cited articles, and the 100 articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios., Study Design: We performed a cross-sectional altmetric and bibliometric study of all obstetrics and gynecology articles indexed in the National Institutes of Health Open Citation Collection from 2004 to 2019. Articles were included if they were published in obstetrics and gynecology journals according to InCites Journal Citation Reports indexing. Citation data, including citation numbers and Relative Citation Ratios, were downloaded on March 20, 2021 and merged with altmetric data from the Altmetric Explorer on the basis of each article's unique PubMed identification number. We assessed correlation between Altmetric Attention Scores and number of citations and Altmetric Attention Scores and Relative Citation Ratios by calculating the Pearson correlation coefficient. The 100 articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores, the 100 most-cited articles, and the 100 articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios were characterized and compared using means (standard deviations) and mean differences (95% confidence intervals)., Results: There were 156,592 articles published in 82 obstetrics and gynecology journals and indexed in the National Institutes of Health Open Citation Collection between 2004 and 2019. The correlation coefficient was 0.18 (95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.19) for Altmetric Attention Scores vs number of citations and 0.10 (95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.11) for Altmetric Attention Scores vs Relative Citation Ratios. There was no overlap among the 100 articles on the highest Altmetric Attention Score list and the 100 most-cited list, and there was minimal overlap among the 100 articles on the highest Altmetric Attention Score list and the 100 highest Relative Citation Ratio list (98 unique articles on each list). Articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores generated substantially more engagement on social media and other public platforms than most-cited articles (mean Altmetric Attention Score, 763.1 [standard deviation, 520.8] vs 49.9 [standard deviation, 81.6]; mean difference, -713.2 [95% confidence interval, -819.9 to -606.6]) and highest Relative Citation Ratio articles (mean, 116.2 [standard deviation, 415.9]; mean difference, -661.5 [95% confidence interval, -746.2 to -576.9]). In contrast, the articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores generated far fewer citations than most-cited articles (mean, 39.7 [standard deviation, 47.6] vs 541.8 [standard deviation, 312.8]; mean difference, 502.0 [95% confidence interval, 439.0-565.0]) and highest Relative Citation Ratio articles (mean, 458.9 [standard deviation, 363.5]; mean difference, 427.7 [95% confidence interval, 353.8-501.6]). Nearly half of articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores were basic/translational studies, often about menopause and environmental factors impacting fertility, whereas most-cited articles and articles with highest Relative Citation Ratios were more likely to be reviews and consensus statements, respectively, often about placentation and polycystic ovary syndrome, respectively. Articles with highest Altmetric Attention Scores were more likely to be published as open-access., Conclusion: There seems to be weak short-term correlation between Altmetric Attention Scores and citation rates. Further study is warranted to ascertain whether there may be long-term correlation between alternative metrics and citation rates in obstetrics and gynecology., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We urgently need answers to basic epidemiological questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant and postpartum women and its effect on their newborns. While many national registries, health facilities, and research groups are collecting relevant data, we need a collaborative and methodologically rigorous approach to better combine these data and address knowledge gaps, especially those related to rare outcomes. We propose that using a sequential, prospective meta-analysis (PMA) is the best approach to generate data for policy- and practice-oriented guidelines. As the pandemic evolves, additional studies identified retrospectively by the steering committee or through living systematic reviews will be invited to participate in this PMA. Investigators can contribute to the PMA by either submitting individual patient data or running standardized code to generate aggregate data estimates. For the primary analysis, we will pool data using two-stage meta-analysis methods. The meta-analyses will be updated as additional data accrue in each contributing study and as additional studies meet study-specific time or data accrual thresholds for sharing. At the time of publication, investigators of 25 studies, including more than 76,000 pregnancies, in 41 countries had agreed to share data for this analysis. Among the included studies, 12 have a contemporaneous comparison group of pregnancies without COVID-19, and four studies include a comparison group of non-pregnant women of reproductive age with COVID-19. Protocols and updates will be maintained publicly. Results will be shared with key stakeholders, including the World Health Organization (WHO) Maternal, Newborn, Child, and Adolescent Health (MNCAH) Research Working Group. Data contributors will share results with local stakeholders. Scientific publications will be published in open-access journals on an ongoing basis., Competing Interests: Clare Whitehead declares a a relationship with the following entities, Ferring Pharmaceuticals COVID19 Investigational, Grant, NHMRC Fellowship (salary support). Edward Mullins declares a relationship with the following entities National Institute for Health Research (Project grant for PAN COVID study). Deborah Money declares a relationship with the following entities, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (payments to my institution only), Public Health Agency of Canada (payments to institution only), BC Women’s Foundation (payments to institution only) and is a Member of the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force sponsored by the Canadian government. Torri D. Metz declares a relationship with the following entities, Pfizer (site Principal Investigator for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy study, money paid to institution and member of Medical Advisory Board for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy study, money paid to me), NICHD (subcommittee Chair for the NICHD Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Gestational Research Assessments of COVID-19 (GRAVID) study), and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (board member). Erica Lokken declares a relationship with the following entity, US NIH (paid institution). Karen L. Kotloff declares a relationship with the following entity, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Siran He declares a relationship with the following entity, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundtion (payments made to institution). Valerie Flaherman declares a relationship with the following entities, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (payments to institution), Yellow Chair Foundation (payments to institution), Robert Woods Johnson Foundation (payments to institution), CDC Foundation, California Health Care Foundation (payments to institution), Tara Health Foundation (payments to institution), UCSF Women’s Health Center of Excellence (payments to institution) and California Department of Health Care Services (payments made to institution). Jose Sanin-Blair declares a relationship with the following entity, Ferring Pharmaceuticals which gave a grant ($10,000) for the expenses of RECOGEST trial and is a part of the Columbian Federation of Perinatology. Yalda Afshar declares a relationship with the following entities, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (payments made to institution), CDC Foundation (payments made to my institution), Robert Woods Johnson Foundation (payments made to institution), and UCLA Dean’s Office COVID-19 research (payments made to institution). Rebecca Clifton declares a relationship with the following entity, NIH HD36801 (MFMU Network DCC). Alice Panchaud declared a relationship with the European Medicines Agency (research grant to institution) and the Federal Office of Public Health Switzerland (research grant to institution).

The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine seeks to ensure excellence in obstetrical outcomes for all people who desire or experience pregnancy, including people with diverse sexual and gender identities. The Society commits to the use of practices in clinical and research settings that affirm the sexual and gender identities of all people, encourages the development of undergraduate and graduate medical education curricula and training programs that address diverse pathways to pregnancy and support clinicians with diverse sexual and gender identities, and promotes the use of inclusive language that is accurate and, when possible, specific., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Discomfort and, to a lesser extent, pain are common complaints during pregnancy, and some patients may turn to opioids for pain relief. Esposito et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2022;191(5):759-768) report associations between intermittent exposure to opioids during pregnancy and the risk of ischemic placental disease-a syndrome that includes preeclampsia, placental abruption, births that are small for gestational age, and preterm delivery. They found that early opioid exposure in pregnancy was associated with a modestly increased risk for abruption, births that are small for gestational age, and preterm delivery, and both early and late exposures were associated with the greatest risk for these outcomes. Surprisingly, preeclampsia was not associated with opioid use. Through quantitative bias analysis, the authors cleverly tackle a number of biases to assess their roles in explaining the associations, including unmeasured confounding, outcome misclassification, and residual confounding; none exerted strong influences on the associations. Although the findings appear fairly robust on the surface, the lack of association between intermittent opioid use and preeclampsia, and important differences in characteristics of patients in the opioid-exposed group compared with the unexposed group, suggest that further study is needed to clarify the relationship between intermittent opioid use, lifestyle factors, and ischemic placental disease risk., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

For many research questions in perinatal epidemiology, gestational age is a mediator that features the causal pathway between exposure and outcome. A mediator is an intermediate variable between an exposure and outcome, which is influenced by the exposure on the causal pathway to the outcome. Therefore, conventional analyses that adjust, stratify, or match for gestational age or its proxy (eg, preterm vs term deliveries) are problematic. This practice, which is entrenched in perinatal research, induces an overadjustment bias. Depending on the causal question, it may be inappropriate to adjust (or condition) for a mediator, such as gestational age, by either design or statistical analysis, but its effect can be quantified through causal mediation analysis. In an exposition of such methods, we demonstrated the relationship between the exposure and outcome and provided a formal analytical framework to quantify the extent to which a causal effect is influenced by a mediator. We reviewed concepts of confounding and causal inference, introduced the concept of a mediator and illustrated the perils of adjusting for a mediator in an exposure-outcome paradigm for a given causal question, adopted causal methods that call for an evaluation of a mediator in a causal exposure effect on the outcome, and discussed unmeasured confounding assumptions in mediation analysis. Furthermore, we reviewed other developments in the causal mediation analysis literature, including decomposition of a total effect when the mediator interacts with the exposure (4-way decomposition), methods for multiple mediators, mediation methods for case-control studies, mediation methods for time-to-event outcomes, sample size and power analysis for mediation analysis, and available software to apply these methods. To illustrate these methods, we provided a clinical example to estimate the risk of perinatal mortality (outcome) concerning placental abruption (exposure) and to determine the extent to which preterm delivery (mediator; a proxy for gestational age) plays a role in this causal effect. We hoped that the adoption of mediation methods described in this review will move research in perinatal epidemiology away from biased adjustments of mediators toward a more nuanced quantification of effects that pose unique challenges and provide unique insights in our field., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To examine the risks of neonatal and infant mortality in relation to infertility treatment and to quantify the extent to which preterm delivery mediates this relationship., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: United States, 2015-2018., Patient(s): A total of 14,961,207 pregnancies resulting in a singleton live birth., Intervention(s): Any infertility treatment, including assisted reproductive technology and fertility-enhancing drugs., Main Outcome Measure(s): Neonatal (<28 days) mortality. The effect measure, risk ratio (RR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were derived from log-linear Poisson models. A causal mediation analysis of the relationship between infertility treatment and mortality associated with preterm delivery (<37 weeks) was performed. The effects of exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding biases were assessed., Result(s): Any infertility treatment was documented in 1.3% (n = 198,986) of pregnancies. Infertility treatment was associated with a 51% increased risk of neonatal mortality (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.39-1.64), with a slightly higher risk for early neonatal mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.43-1.73) than late neonatal mortality (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.11-1.58). These risks were similar for pregnancies conceived through assisted reproductive technology and fertility-enhancing drugs. The mediation analysis showed that 72% (95% CI 59-85) of the total effect of infertility treatment on neonatal mortality was mediated through preterm delivery. In a sensitivity analysis, following corrections for exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding biases, these risks were higher for early, but not for late, neonatal mortality., Conclusion(s): Pregnancies conceived with infertility treatment are associated with increased neonatal mortality, and this association is largely mediated through preterm delivery. However, given the substantial underreporting of infertility treatment, these associations must be cautiously interpreted., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Universal testing for COVID-19 on admission to the labor and delivery unit identifies asymptomatic patients. Whether or not these patients are at increased risk for adverse outcomes and go on to develop clinically significant disease is uncertain., Objective: This study aimed to assess the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 presentation among pregnant patients admitted for delivery and to determine whether these patients become symptomatic or require hospital readmission after discharge., Study Design: We performed a multicenter, prospective cohort study of pregnant patients who delivered between 20 0/7 and 41 6/7 weeks' gestation and who were found to have COVID-19 based on universal screening on admission for delivery at 1 of 4 medical centers in New Jersey (exposed group). The unexposed group, comprising patients who tested negative for COVID-19, were identified at the primary study site. The primary outcomes were the rates of asymptomatic COVID-19 presentation, the development of symptoms among the asymptomatic positive patients, and hospital readmission rates in the 2 weeks following discharge. We compared the frequency of the distribution of risk factors and outcomes in relation to the COVID-19 status among patients with COVID-19 across all centers and among those without COVID-19 at the primary site. Associations between categorical risk factors and COVID-19 status were expressed as relative risks with 95% confidence intervals., Results: Between April 10, 2020, and June 15, 2020, there were 218 patients with COVID-19 at the 4 sites and 413 patients without COVID-19 at the primary site. The majority (188 [83.2%]) of patients with COVID-19 were asymptomatic. Compared with the negative controls, these asymptomatic patients were not at increased risk for obstetrical complications that may increase the risk associated with COVID-19, including gestational diabetes (8.2% vs 11.4%; risk ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-2.01) and gestational hypertension (6.1% vs 7.0%; risk ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-2.67). Postpartum follow-ups via telephone surveys revealed that these patients remained asymptomatic and had low rates of family contacts acquiring the disease, but their adherence to social distancing guidelines waned during the 2-week postpartum period. Review of inpatient and emergency department records revealed low rates of hospital readmission., Conclusion: Most of the pregnant patients who screened positive for COVID-19 are asymptomatic and do not go on to develop clinically significant infection after delivery. Routine surveillance of these patients after hospital discharge appears to be sufficient., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

[Figure: see text].

Objective: To evaluate the association between infertility treatments and small for gestational age (SGA) births., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: United States, 2015-2019., Patients: Women (n = 16,836,228) who delivered nonmalformed, singleton live births (24-44 weeks' gestation)., Interventions: Any infertility treatment, including assisted reproductive technology (ART) and prescribed fertility-enhancing medications., Main Outcome Measures: Small for gestational age birth, defined as sex-specific birth weight <10% for gestational age. Associations between SGA and infertility treatment were derived from Poisson regression with robust variance. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were derived after adjusting for confounders. In a sensitivity analysis, we corrected for nondifferential exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding biases., Results: Subsequently, 1.4% (n = 231,177) of pregnancies resulted from infertility treatments (0.8% ART and 0.6% fertility-enhancing medications). Of these, SGA births occurred in 9.4% (n = 21,771) and 11.9% (n = 1,755,925) of pregnancies conceived with infertility treatment and naturally conceived pregnancies, respectively (adjusted RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06, 1.08). However, after correction for misclassification bias and unmeasured confounding, infertility treatment was associated with a 27% reduced risk of SGA (bias-corrected RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.85). Similar trends were seen for analyses stratified by exposure to ART and fertility-enhancing medications, as well as for SGA <5th and <3rd percentiles., Conclusions: Exposure to infertility treatment is associated with a reduced risk of SGA births. These findings, which are contrary to some published reports, may reflect changes in the modern practice of infertility care, maternal lifestyle, and compliance with prenatal care within the infertile population. Until these findings are corroborated, the associations must be cautiously interpreted., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 may be associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnancy, but there are few controlled data to quantify the magnitude of these risks or to characterize the epidemiology and risk factors., Objective: This study aimed to quantify the associations of coronavirus disease 2019 with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnancy and to characterize the epidemiology and risk factors., Study Design: We performed a matched case-control study of pregnant patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 cases who delivered between 16 and 41 weeks' gestation from March 11 to June 11, 2020. Uninfected pregnant women (controls) were matched to coronavirus disease 2019 cases on a 2:1 ratio based on delivery date. Maternal demographic characteristics, coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms, laboratory evaluations, obstetrical and neonatal outcomes, and clinical management were chart abstracted. The primary outcomes included (1) a composite of adverse maternal outcome, defined as preeclampsia, venous thromboembolism, antepartum admission, maternal intensive care unit admission, need for mechanical ventilation, supplemental oxygen, or maternal death, and (2) a composite of adverse neonatal outcome, defined as respiratory distress syndrome, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, 5-minute Apgar score of <5, persistent category 2 fetal heart rate tracing despite intrauterine resuscitation, or neonatal death. To quantify the associations between exposure to mild and severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed using conditional logistic regression (to account for matching), with matched-pair odds ratio and 95% confidence interval based on 1000 bias-corrected bootstrap resampling as the effect measure. Associations were adjusted for potential confounders., Results: A total of 61 confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 cases were enrolled during the study period (mild disease, n=54 [88.5%]; severe disease, n=6 [9.8%]; critical disease, n=1 [1.6%]). The odds of adverse composite maternal outcome were 3.4 times higher among cases than controls (18.0% vs 8.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-13.4). The odds of adverse composite neonatal outcome were 1.7 times higher in the case group than to the control group (18.0% vs 13.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-4.8). Stratified analyses by disease severity indicated that the morbidity associated with coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy was largely driven by the severe or critical disease phenotype. Major risk factors for associated morbidity were black and Hispanic race, advanced maternal age, medical comorbidities, and antepartum admissions related to coronavirus disease 2019., Conclusion: Coronavirus disease 2019 during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, an association that is primarily driven by morbidity associated with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019. Black and Hispanic race, obesity, advanced maternal age, medical comorbidities, and antepartum admissions related to coronavirus disease 2019 are risk factors for associated morbidity., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Conservation easements are the fastest growing private conservation strategy in the United States. However, mechanisms to assess private land conservation as well as their support by the general public are not well understood. This study uses the ecosystem services framework for assessing existing private lands in Idaho and identifies areas for future conservation easements. Using conservation targets of the land trust as a guide for selecting ecosystem services, we (a) mapped the spatial delivery of conservation targets across public and private lands, (b) explored public awareness in terms of social importance and vulnerability, and (c) mapped future priority areas by characterizing conservation bundles. We found that public lands provided the highest levels of conservation targets, and we found no difference in conservation target provision between private areas and conservation easements. The spatial characterization of conservation target bundles identified potential future priority areas for conservation easements, which can guide planning of land trust conservation efforts.

Background: The Relative Citation Ratio is a novel bibliometric tool that quantifies the impact of research articles. The objectives of this study were to identify the 100 obstetrics and gynecology articles with the highest relative citation ratios, evaluate how characteristics of these articles changed over time, and compare characteristics of these articles with top-cited obstetrics and gynecology articles., Objective: We undertook a cross-sectional bibliometric study to examine the 100 obstetrics and gynecology articles with the highest relative citation ratios and the top 100 cited articles in the National Institutes of Health Open Citations Collection from 1980 to 2019., Study Design: We identified every obstetrics and gynecology article published from 1980 to 2019 that was indexed in the National Institutes of Health Open Citations Collection. The top 100 articles with the highest relative citation ratios and the top 100 cited articles were selected for further review. Each article was evaluated using metrics of influence, translation, and other characteristics. We compared the top 100 articles with the highest relative citation ratios published from 1980 to 1999 versus 2000 to 2019 and characteristics of the top 100 articles with the highest relative citation ratios versus the top 100 top-cited articles (after excluding those on both lists). Means, standard deviations, and mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Associations were expressed as relative risks (95% confidence interval)., Results: A total of 323,673 obstetrics and gynecology articles were published between 1980 and 2019. Among the top 100 articles with the highest relative citation ratios, most were observational studies (36%), reviews (26%), and consensus statements (21%). There were only 5 randomized clinical trials. Compared with the articles with the highest relative citation ratios published from 1980 to 1999, articles published from 2000 to 2019 were more likely about benign gynecology (relative risks, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-2.8) and less likely about gynecology-oncology (relative risks, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.9) and urogynecology (relative risks, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-3.3). The articles after 2000 were more likely about systematic reviews (relative risks, 7.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-58.3) and consensus statements (relative risks, 5.1; 95% confidence intervals, 1.6-16.3) and were published as open access articles (relative risks, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-2.0). There were 60 articles in common between the top 100 articles with the highest relative citation ratios and the top 100 cited articles. Compared with articles that were top cited (after excluding articles on both lists), articles with the highest relative citation ratios received fewer mean citations (266.9 [135.3] vs 514.3 [54.6]; mean differences, 247.4; 95% confidence interval, 201.5-293.3) but had higher numbers of citations per year (37.5 [4.1] vs 31.6 [8.1]; mean difference, -5.9; 95% confidence interval, -14.6 to -2.7). Compared with the articles with the highest relative citation ratios, top-cited articles were more likely to address gynecology topics (relative risk, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.5), less likely to be randomized clinical trials (relative risk, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-3.8), and less likely to be published as open access articles (relative risk, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.86)., Conclusion: The Relative Citation Ratio is a novel bibliometric tool that does not rely on absolute citation rates and provides unique insight into the dissemination of knowledge in obstetrics and gynecology. Nearly half of the influential obstetrics and gynecology articles identified with this metric would not have been recognized as citation classics by conventional bibliometric analysis., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)