Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Protocol

Inter-pregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes among women with delayed childbearing: protocol for a systematic review

Authors: Mani Asgharpour, Sofia Villarreal, Laura Schummers, Jennifer Hutcheon, Dorothy Shaw, Wendy V. Norman

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Women in high resource nations are increasingly delaying childbearing until their thirties. Delayed childbearing poses challenges for the spacing of a woman’s pregnancies. Inter-pregnancy intervals <12 months are associated with risk for adverse pregnancy outcome, yet increased maternal age at delivery is linked with increased risk. The optimal inter-pregnancy interval for older mothers is uncertain. This systematic review will aim to assess the relation between inter-pregnancy interval and perinatal and maternal health outcomes in women who delay childbearing to age 30 and older.

Methods

We will search MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases for peer-reviewed articles on the effects of inter-pregnancy interval on perinatal and maternal health outcomes among women over 29 years at the time of first birth, in high-income countries. To assess the quality of studies, the Cochrane’s Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias will be used for randomized controlled trials, and the Newcastle-Ottawa tool to assess quality of case control and cross-sectional studies. The quality of the findings on each outcome will be assessed across studies, using the GRADE approach. The decision to conduct meta-analyses will be based on the concordance in definitions used for inter-pregnancy intervals, age groups studied, or outcomes measured among selected studies. We will report odds ratios and/or relative risks and/or risk differences for different inter-pregnancy intervals and perinatal and maternal outcomes as well as pregnancy complications.

Discussion

This systematic review will summarize existing data on the relation between inter-pregnancy interval and perinatal and maternal health outcomes among women who delay childbearing to age 30 and older. Findings will inform clinical best practices to assist mothers over age 30 to space their pregnancies appropriately.

Systematic review registration

Prospero CRD42015019057
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
4.
go back to reference Johnson JA, Tough S. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Delayed child-bearing. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2012;34(1):80–93.CrossRefPubMed Johnson JA, Tough S. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Delayed child-bearing. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2012;34(1):80–93.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Carolan M. The graying of the obstetric population: implications for the older mother. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2003;32(1):19–27.CrossRefPubMed Carolan M. The graying of the obstetric population: implications for the older mother. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2003;32(1):19–27.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermúdez A, Kafury-Goeta AC. Effects of birth spacing on maternal health: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196(4):297–308.CrossRefPubMed Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermúdez A, Kafury-Goeta AC. Effects of birth spacing on maternal health: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196(4):297–308.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermúdez A, Kafury-Goeta AC. Birth spacing and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006;295(15):1809–23.CrossRefPubMed Conde-Agudelo A, Rosas-Bermúdez A, Kafury-Goeta AC. Birth spacing and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006;295(15):1809–23.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Zhu BP, Rolfs RT, Nangle BE, Horan JM. Effect of the interval between pregnancies on perinatal outcomes. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(8):589–94.CrossRefPubMed Zhu BP, Rolfs RT, Nangle BE, Horan JM. Effect of the interval between pregnancies on perinatal outcomes. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(8):589–94.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:4053–4-1. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:4053–4-1.
11.
go back to reference The World Bank. Country and lending groups. 2016. http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-and-lending-groups. Accessed 8 Feb 2016. The World Bank. Country and lending groups. 2016. http://​data.​worldbank.​org/​about/​country-and-lending-groups.​ Accessed 8 Feb 2016.
16.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011. http://handbook.cochrane.org/front_page.htm. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011. http://​handbook.​cochrane.​org/​front_​page.​htm.​
Metadata
Title
Inter-pregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes among women with delayed childbearing: protocol for a systematic review
Authors
Mani Asgharpour
Sofia Villarreal
Laura Schummers
Jennifer Hutcheon
Dorothy Shaw
Wendy V. Norman
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0464-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Systematic Reviews 1/2017 Go to the issue