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

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 χ2 test and I2 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.

Reproductive outcomes in women and men using complementary and alternative medicine treatment and not receiving artificial reproductive technology: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Infertility is a global problem, but only a minority of couples access assisted reproductive technologies due to financial and sociocultural barriers. Complementary and alternative medicine are seen as another option. We aimed to determine the impact of complementary and alternative medicine on conception, miscarriage and live birth rates in couples not receiving assisted reproductive technology treatments. METHODS: The electronic databases EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database were systematically searched before March 24th 2020. Reference lists of eligible studies were searched for relevant studies. Eligible studies included trials and observational studies that assessed a complementary or alternative medicine and conception, miscarriage or live births in men or women not undergoing fertility treatment. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers using a pre-designed data collection form. The study protocol was published in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018086980). RESULTS: Twenty randomized controlled trials were identified, including 2748 individuals. Most studies did not demonstrate any effect of a complementary or alternative medicine on pregnancy, live birth or miscarriage rates. Limited evidence was found for a positive effect of herbal therapies taken by women on conception rates. There was substantial diversity in quality across the studies. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine on improving the chances of conception and live births, or increasing miscarriage risk. Owing to the generally sub-optimal quality and heterogeneous nature of the evidence, rigorous studies are needed to determine the impact of complementary and alternative medicine on fertility.