Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Protocol

Early pregnancy loss incidence in high-income settings: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: L. Schummers, N. Oveisi, M. S. Ohtsuka, J. A. Hutcheon, K. A. Ahrens, J. Liauw, W. V. Norman

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Early pregnancy loss (unintended pregnancy loss before 20 completed weeks of gestation) is a common adverse pregnancy outcome, with previous evidence reporting incidence ranging from 10 to 30% of detected pregnancies. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the incidence and range of early pregnancy loss in contemporary pregnant populations based on studies with good internal and external validity. Findings may be useful for clinical counseling in pre-conception and family planning settings and for people who experience early pregnancy loss.

Methods

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases using combinations of medical subject headings and keywords. Peer-reviewed, full-text original research articles that meet the following criteria will be included: (1) human study; (2) study designs: controlled clinical trials or observational studies with at least 100 pregnancies in the denominator, or systematic reviews of studies using these designs; (3) conducted in high-income countries; (4) reporting early pregnancy loss incidence, defined as unintended early pregnancy loss occurring prior to 20 weeks’ gestation expressed as the number of losses among all pregnancies in the study period; (5) among a contemporary (1990 or later) general population of pregnancies; and (6) published between January 1, 1990, and August 31, 2021. We will assess the quality of included studies according to the United States Preventive Services Task Force Criteria for Assessing Internal and External Validity of Individual Studies. If appropriate, based on methodological comparability across included studies, we will conduct meta-analyses using random effects models to estimate the pooled incidence of early pregnancy loss among all studies with both good internal and external validity, with meta-analyses stratified by study design type (survey-based or self-reported and medical record-based), by induced abortion restrictions (restricted vs. unrestricted), and by gestational age (first trimester only vs. all gestational ages before 20 weeks).

Discussion

This systematic review will synthesize existing evidence to calculate a current estimate of early pregnancy loss incidence and variability in reported incidence estimates in high-income settings. The findings of this review may inform updates to clinical counseling in pre-conception and family planning settings, as well as for patients experiencing early pregnancy loss.

Systematic review registration

We have registered this review with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO #226267).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Zinaman MJ, Clegg ED, Brown CC, O'Connor J, Selevan SG. Estimates of human fertility and pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 1996;65(3):503–9.CrossRef Zinaman MJ, Clegg ED, Brown CC, O'Connor J, Selevan SG. Estimates of human fertility and pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 1996;65(3):503–9.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 200: early pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(5):197–207.CrossRef American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 200: early pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(5):197–207.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage: diagnosis and initial management. NICE guideline [NG126] 17 April 2019. Ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage: diagnosis and initial management. NICE guideline [NG126] 17 April 2019.
6.
go back to reference Knudsen UB, Hansen V, Juul S, Secher NJ. Prognosis of a new pregnancy following previous spontaneous abortions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1991;39(1):31–6.CrossRef Knudsen UB, Hansen V, Juul S, Secher NJ. Prognosis of a new pregnancy following previous spontaneous abortions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1991;39(1):31–6.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Matthews TJ, Hamilton BE. Delayed childbearing: more women are having their first child later in life. NCHS Data Brief. 2009;21:1–8. Matthews TJ, Hamilton BE. Delayed childbearing: more women are having their first child later in life. NCHS Data Brief. 2009;21:1–8.
15.
go back to reference Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis KE, Groves RM, van Hoewyk J, Willem J. National Survey of Family Growth, cycle 6: sample design, weighting, imputation, and variance estimation. Vital Health Stat 2. 2006;142:1–82. Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis KE, Groves RM, van Hoewyk J, Willem J. National Survey of Family Growth, cycle 6: sample design, weighting, imputation, and variance estimation. Vital Health Stat 2. 2006;142:1–82.
18.
go back to reference Adolfsson A, Larsson P-G, Genus och M, Linköpings U, Institutionen för klinisk och experimentell m, Hälsouniversitetet. Cumulative incidence of previous spontaneous abortion in Sweden in 1983-2003: a register study. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. Oxford: Informa UK Ltd; 2006. p. 741–7. Adolfsson A, Larsson P-G, Genus och M, Linköpings U, Institutionen för klinisk och experimentell m, Hälsouniversitetet. Cumulative incidence of previous spontaneous abortion in Sweden in 1983-2003: a register study. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. Oxford: Informa UK Ltd; 2006. p. 741–7.
19.
go back to reference Curtin SC, Abma JC, Ventura SJ, Henshaw SK. Pregnancy rates for U.S. women continue to drop. NCHS Data Brief. 2013;136:1–8. Curtin SC, Abma JC, Ventura SJ, Henshaw SK. Pregnancy rates for U.S. women continue to drop. NCHS Data Brief. 2013;136:1–8.
29.
go back to reference Lash TL, Fox MP, MacLehose RF, Maldonado G, McCandless LC, Greenland S. Good practices for quantitative bias analysis. Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(6):1969–85.CrossRef Lash TL, Fox MP, MacLehose RF, Maldonado G, McCandless LC, Greenland S. Good practices for quantitative bias analysis. Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(6):1969–85.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Covidence Systematic Review Software. Melbourne: Veritas Health Innovation; 2020. Covidence Systematic Review Software. Melbourne: Veritas Health Innovation; 2020.
34.
go back to reference Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG, Group obotCSM. Chapter 10: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: JPT H, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Training; 2021. chap 10. Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG, Group obotCSM. Chapter 10: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: JPT H, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Training; 2021. chap 10.
Metadata
Title
Early pregnancy loss incidence in high-income settings: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors
L. Schummers
N. Oveisi
M. S. Ohtsuka
J. A. Hutcheon
K. A. Ahrens
J. Liauw
W. V. Norman
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01815-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Systematic Reviews 1/2021 Go to the issue