47
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Racial discrimination and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Racial discrimination has been consistently linked to various health outcomes and health disparities, including studies associating racial discrimination with patterns of racial disparities in adverse pregnancy outcomes. To expand our knowledge, this systematic review and meta-analysis assesses all available evidence on the association between self-reported racial discrimination and adverse pregnancy outcomes.

          Methods

          Eight electronic databases were searched without language or time restrictions, through January 2022. Data were extracted using a pre-piloted extraction tool. Quality assessment was conducted using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS), and across all included studies using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on preterm birth and small for gestational age. Heterogenicity was assessed using Cochran’s χ 2 test and I 2 statistic.

          Results

          Of 13 597 retrieved records, 24 articles were included. Studies included cohort, case–control and cross-sectional designs and were predominantly conducted in the USA (n=20). Across all outcomes, significant positive associations (between experiencing racial discrimination and an adverse pregnancy event) and non-significant associations (trending towards positive) were reported, with no studies reporting significant negative associations. The overall pooled odds ratio (OR) for preterm birth was 1.40 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.68; 13 studies) and for small for gestational age it was 1.23 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.99; 3 studies). When excluding low-quality studies, the preterm birth OR attenuated to 1.31 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.59; 10 studies). Similar results were obtained across sensitivity and subgroup analyses, indicating a significant positive association.

          Conclusion

          These results suggest that racial discrimination has adverse impacts on pregnancy outcomes. This is supported by the broader literature on racial discrimination as a risk factor for adverse health outcomes. To further explore this association and underlying mechanisms, including mediating and moderating factors, higher quality evidence from large ethnographically diverse cohorts is needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references112

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Glob Health
                BMJ Glob Health
                bmjgh
                bmjgh
                BMJ Global Health
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2059-7908
                2022
                27 June 2022
                : 7
                : 8
                : e009227
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentCardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care , Cambridge University , Cambridge, UK
                [2 ] departmentFaculty of Medicine & Dentistry , University of Alberta , Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
                [3 ] departmentDepartment of Medicine , Albert Einstein College of Medicine , Bronx, New York City, USA
                [4 ] Cayetano Heredia University , Lima, Peru
                [5 ] University of East Anglia , Norwich, UK
                [6 ] Vanderbilt University School of Medicine , Nashville, Tennessee, USA
                [7 ] departmentSchool of Clinical Medicine , University of Cambridge , Cambridge, UK
                [8 ] departmentMedical Library, School of Clinical Medicine , University of Cambridge , Cambridge, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Kim Robin van Daalen; krv22@ 123456cam.ac.uk

                KRvD and JK are joint first authors.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6955-9708
                Article
                bmjgh-2022-009227
                10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009227
                9344988
                35918071
                fae052d0-b776-4a53-a5b2-bcc7b4c88276
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 30 March 2022
                : 21 May 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Gates Cambridge;
                Award ID: OPP1144
                Categories
                Original Research
                1506
                1612
                Custom metadata
                unlocked
                press-release
                press-release

                maternal health,public health,systematic review,child health

                Comments

                Comment on this article