MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3211987525 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deab252

The association between miscarriage and fecundability: the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study

2021· article· en· W3211987525 sur OpenAlexaff
Lise A Arge, Siri E. Håberg, Allen J. Wilcox, Øyvind Næss, Olga Basso, Maria C. Magnus

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueReproductive System and Pregnancy
Établissements canadiensMcGill University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMiscarriagePregnancyMedicineObstetricsGynecologyFertilityAbortionCohortCohort studyRelative riskPopulationConfidence intervalInternal medicineBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

STUDY QUESTION: Is fecundability associated with miscarriage history and future miscarriage risk? SUMMARY ANSWER: Prior miscarriage was associated with lower fecundability, and participants with a history of subfertility (time-to-pregnancy (TTP) ≥12 months) were at a higher risk of subsequent miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although miscarriage and low fecundability share common risk factors, prior studies have reported both lower and higher fecundability after miscarriage. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this study, we examined two related associations: one, between miscarriage history and subsequent fecundability and, two, between fecundability and miscarriage risk in the subsequent pregnancy. The study is based on the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). In addition, the outcome of the pregnancy after the MoBa index pregnancy was obtained by linking information from three national health registries: the Medical Birth Registry of Norway, the Norwegian Patient Registry and the general practice database. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We examined the association between number of prior miscarriages and fecundability in 48 537 naturally conceived, planned pregnancies in participants with at least one prior pregnancy. We estimated fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% CIs using proportional probability regression. We further estimated the relative risk (RR) of miscarriage in the subsequent pregnancy as a function of TTP in the MoBa index pregnancy for 7889 pregnancies using log-binomial regression. Multivariable analyses adjusted for maternal age, pre-pregnancy maternal BMI, smoking status, cycle regularity, income level and highest completed or ongoing education. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Fecundability decreased as the number of prior miscarriages increased. The adjusted FRs among women with one, two and three or more prior miscarriages were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.85), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.74-0.83) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.67-0.82), respectively, compared with women with no prior miscarriages. Compared to women with a TTP of <3 months, the adjusted RR of miscarriage in the subsequent pregnancy was 1.16 (0.99-1.35) with TTP of 3-6 months, 1.18 (0.93-1.49) with TTP of 7-11 months and 1.43 (1.13-1.81) with TTP of 12 or more months. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Information on TTP and prior miscarriages was obtained retrospectively, and TTP was self-reported. MoBa is a pregnancy cohort, and findings may not be generalizable to all women. We were unable to examine the effect of changing partners between pregnancies, as well as other paternal factors such as seminal parameters. We also did not know what proportion of our participants had changed partners between their prior pregnancies and the index pregnancy. Furthermore, it is likely that many early miscarriages are not recognized. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The association between miscarriage and fecundability may reflect a contribution of occult pregnancy losses to TTP, as well as shared underlying causes for reduced fecundability and miscarriage. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Research Council of Norway through its Medical Student Research Program funding scheme (project number 271555/F20), its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 262700) and through the project 'Women's fertility - an essential component of health and well-being' (project number 320656). M.C.M. has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement number 947684). A.J.W. is supported by the Intramural Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences at the National Institutes of Health, USA. The authors report no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,025
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,247
Écart entre enseignants0,235 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetReproductive System and PregnancyTravaux en français237 207