MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence Of Shift Work On Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2953902447 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chenxi Cai, Robin Featherstone, Meghan Sebastianski, Margie H. Davenport

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioShift workPregnancyConfidence intervalObservational studyObstetricsMiscarriageMeta-analysisGestational ageGestationPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shift work including rotating shift and night shift has been suggested to be associated with risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes due to disrupted circadian rhythms and neuroendocrine adaptations which may affect fetal growth and timing of parturition. PURPOSE: To evaluate the association between shift work and pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: Five electronic databases and two grey literature sources were searched up to March 12, 2018 and the results underwent duplicate independent screening. Studies of all designs were included (except case studies), and contained information on the Population [women who engaged in paid work during pregnancy], Exposure [rotating shift work (working a pattern of days and nights) or fixed night shift (typical working day between 22:00 to 08:00)], Comparator [fixed day shift (typical working day between 8:00-18:00)], and Outcomes [preterm birth, low birthweight, small for gestational age, miscarriage, gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia]. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect, inverse variance method. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to assess the quality of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 41 observational studies (N=145,671) were included. “Low” to “Very low” quality evidence from observational studies revealed that compared with fixed day shift, rotating shift was associated with an increased odds of preterm delivery (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.3, I2=34%) and having a small-for-gestational age baby (OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.39, I2=11%). Fixed night shift was associated with an increase odds of preterm delivery (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.48, I2=36%), miscarriage (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.57, I2=34%) and gestational hypertension (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.48, I2=0%). When meta-analysis was restricted only to adjusted ORs, fixed night shift was associated with an increase in risk of miscarriage (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.63, I2=38%). Rotating shift or fixed night shift were not significantly associated with low birth weight or pre-eclampsia. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women who work with rotating shift or fixed night shift have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Supported by Alberta OHS Futures Research Grant and the Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.034
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicSleep and Work-Related FatigueFrench-language works237,207