The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2018
The association between Mullerian anomalies and IUGR: a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karami Manoochehr, Jenabi Ensiyeh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Published literature regarding the association between Mullerian anomalies and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) is controversial. To date, no meta-analysis has been performed for assessing the relationship between the Mullerian anomalies and IUGR. Therefore, the aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis by combining data from relevant studies to assessing the association of between Mullerian anomalies and IUGR.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science to identify of all studies prior to September 2017. Egger's and Begg's tests were carried out to quantitatively assess publication bias. To estimate the heterogeneity among studies the Q-statistic test and I-squared (I2) test were used. The random-effects model was conducted to obtain pooled odds ratio (OR) as a measure of the association between Mullerian anomalies and IUGR.
RESULTS: A total of seven studies were included in this meta-analysis with a sample of 605,005 participants. The pooled overall OR was 1.93 (95% CI: 1.52, 2.34).
CONCLUSIONS: We reported that mullerian anomalies are a risk factor for IUGR. However, further evidence by larger prospective cohort studies is needed to make conclusive evidence regarding the association between mullerian anomalies and IUGR.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science to identify of all studies prior to September 2017. Egger's and Begg's tests were carried out to quantitatively assess publication bias. To estimate the heterogeneity among studies the Q-statistic test and I-squared (I2) test were used. The random-effects model was conducted to obtain pooled odds ratio (OR) as a measure of the association between Mullerian anomalies and IUGR.
RESULTS: A total of seven studies were included in this meta-analysis with a sample of 605,005 participants. The pooled overall OR was 1.93 (95% CI: 1.52, 2.34).
CONCLUSIONS: We reported that mullerian anomalies are a risk factor for IUGR. However, further evidence by larger prospective cohort studies is needed to make conclusive evidence regarding the association between mullerian anomalies and IUGR.