MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390743394 · doi:10.1111/aogs.14764

Outcomes of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in early pregnancy—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2024· review· en· W4390743394 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kenny A. Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Hanna Nilsson, Emelie Bergman Røthe, Allan Z. Zhao, Prakesh S. Shah, Ganesh Acharya

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersVetenskapsrådetRadiumhemmets ForskningsfonderCancerfonden
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyMiscarriageObstetricsGestationMeta-analysisCohort studyGestational ageProspective cohort studyMEDLINEPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Available data on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and pregnancy outcomes mostly refer to women contracting the infection during advanced pregnancy or close to delivery. There is limited information on the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection in early pregnancy and outcomes thereof. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We aimed to systematically review the maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection in early pregnancy, defined as <20 weeks of gestation (PROSPERO Registration 2020 CRD42020177673). Searches were carried out in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus databases from January 2020 until April 2023 and the WHO database of publications on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from December 2019 to April 2023. Cohort and case-control studies on COVID-19 occurring in early pregnancy that reported data on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes were included. Case reports and studies reporting only exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or not stratifying outcomes based on gestational age were excluded. Data were extracted in duplicate. Meta-analyses were conducted when appropriate, using R meta (R version 4.0.5). RESULTS: A total of 18 studies, 12 retrospective and six prospective, were included in this review, reporting on 10 147 SARS-CoV-2-positive women infected in early pregnancy, 9533 neonates, and 180 882 SARS-CoV-2 negative women. The studies had low to moderate risk of bias according to the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment Scale. The studies showed significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity. A meta-analysis could be performed only on the outcome miscarriage rate, with a pooled random effect odds ratio of 1.44 (95% confidence interval 0.96-2.18), showing no statistical difference in miscarriage in SARS-CoV-2-infected women. Individual studies reported increased incidences of stillbirth, low birthweight and preterm birth among neonates born to mothers affected by COVID-19 in early pregnancy; however, these results were not consistent among all studies. CONCLUSIONS: In this comprehensive systematic review of available evidence, we identified no statistically significant adverse association between SARS-CoV-2 infection in early pregnancy (before 20 weeks of gestation) and fetal, neonatal, or maternal outcomes. However, a 44% increase in miscarriage rate is concerning and further studies of larger sample size are needed to confirm or refute our findings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207