Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Nov 1;328(17):1714-1729.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.19097.

Associations of Unintended Pregnancy With Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Associations of Unintended Pregnancy With Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Heidi D Nelson et al. JAMA. .

Abstract

Importance: Unintended pregnancy is common in the US and is associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes; however, estimates of these associations specific to current US populations are lacking.

Objective: To evaluate associations of unintended pregnancy with maternal and infant health outcomes during pregnancy and post partum with studies relevant to current clinical practice and public health in the US.

Data sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and MEDLINE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 15, 2022) and manual review of reference lists.

Study selection: Epidemiologic studies relevant to US populations that compared key maternal and infant health outcomes for unintended vs intended pregnancies and met prespecified eligibility criteria were included after investigators' independent dual review of abstracts and full-text articles.

Data extraction and synthesis: Investigators abstracted data from publications on study methods, participant characteristics, settings, pregnancy intention, comparators, confounders, and outcomes; data were validated by a second investigator. Risk of bias was independently dual rated by investigators using criteria developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Results of studies controlling for confounders were combined by using a profile likelihood random-effects model.

Main outcomes and measures: Prenatal depression, postpartum depression, maternal experience of interpersonal violence, preterm birth, and infant low birth weight.

Results: Thirty-six studies (N = 524 522 participants) were included (14 cohort studies rated good or fair quality; 22 cross-sectional studies); 12 studies used large population-based data sources. Compared with intended pregnancy, unintended pregnancy was significantly associated with higher odds of depression during pregnancy (23.3% vs 13.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.59 [95% CI, 1.35-1.92]; I2 = 85.0%; 15 studies [n = 41 054]) and post partum (15.7% vs 9.6%; aOR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.40-1.70]; I2 = 7.1%; 10 studies [n = 82 673]), interpersonal violence (14.6% vs 5.5%; aOR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.41-2.91]; I2 = 64.1%; 5 studies [n = 42 306]), preterm birth (9.4% vs 7.7%; aOR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.12-1.31]; I2 = 1.7%; 10 studies [n = 94 351]), and infant low birth weight (7.3% vs 5.2%; aOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.21]; I2 = 0.0%; 8 studies [n = 87 547]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses based on controlling for history of depression for prenatal and postpartum depression and on study design and definition of unintended pregnancy for relevant outcomes. Studies provided limited sociodemographic data and measurement of confounders and outcomes varied.

Conclusions and relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic observational studies relevant to US populations, unintended pregnancy, compared with intended pregnancy, was significantly associated with adverse maternal and infant outcomes.

Trial registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020192981.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Nelson reported receiving institutional funding for research related to this topic from the US Health Resources and Services Administration. Dr Darney reported receiving grants from Organon, US Office of Population Affairs, and the National Institutes of Health; personal fees from the journal Contraception; nonfinancial support from the Society of Family Planning; and support for travel to meetings from the Society of Family Planning and American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology outside the submitted work. Dr Darney reported serving as an expert panel member for the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and a board member for the Society of Family Planning and Health Research Consortium (CISIDAT), Mexico. Dr Cantor reported receiving institutional funding for research related to this topic from the US Health Resources and Services Administration, US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Dr Goueth reported receiving institutional funding for research related to this topic from the National Library of Medicine and Society of Family Planning. Dr Fu reported receiving grants from Oregon Health & Science University during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Literature Search Flow Diagram
aExcluded studies addressed other key questions of the systematic review. bSome studies included more than 1 outcome.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Maternal Outcomesa
The sizes of the boxes represent numbers of participants in each study. The vertical dashed lines indicate the location of the adjusted odds ratio of the overall estimate. NA indicates data were not available; PL, profile likelihood. aTotals do not include all participants because some studies did not report data.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Infant Outcomesa
The sizes of the boxes represent numbers of participants in each study. The vertical dashed lines indicate the location of the adjusted odds ratio of the overall estimate. NA indicates data were not available; PL, profile likelihood. aTotals do not include all participants because some studies did not report data.

Comment in

References

    1. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Declines in unintended pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(9):843-852. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1506575 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Key statistics from the National Survey of Family Growth – I listing. Accessed September 15, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/i-keystat.htm#intendbirthby...
    1. Gipson JD, Koenig MA, Hindin MJ. The effects of unintended pregnancy on infant, child, and parental health: a review of the literature. Stud Fam Plann. 2008;39(1):18-38. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2008.00148.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists . Committee opinion no. 615: access to contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):250-255. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000459866.14114.33 - DOI - PubMed
    1. US Department of Health and Human Services . Healthy People 2030: pregnancy and childbirth. Accessed September 15, 2022. https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/p...

MeSH terms