Systematic ReviewResearch

Maternal anemia was associated with higher odds of preterm birth

The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine (PubMed)Sep 3, 2026

AI-summarized from the linked source. Educational brief, not medical advice.

Brief summary

A meta-analysis linked maternal anemia with preterm birth, but it did not establish that anemia treatment prevents early delivery.

What NurseJet pulled from the source

The review included 45 articles covering 60 study populations and 2,119,392 pregnant individuals. The pooled odds ratio for preterm birth was 1.28 (95% CI 1.20–1.36). Between-study heterogeneity was substantial.

Why this matters for nurses

This association provides context for discussing anemia within pregnancy risk assessment.

Bedside takeaway

Use this evidence to inform discussion of maternal risk; follow the local anemia screening and treatment pathway.

Key takeaways

Heterogeneity was high (I² 95.54%).
The authors identified possible publication bias.
The findings describe an association, not an absolute risk increase or a treatment effect.

Practice implications

Use this evidence to inform discussion of maternal risk; follow the local anemia screening and treatment pathway.

Limitations & cautions

Abstract-only summary. High heterogeneity and potential publication bias limit confidence in a single pooled estimate. This review does not test a specific screening or supplementation strategy.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations

Exact source links

Open source

Public citations are filtered to exact credible source pages. Homepage-only or invalid links stay in admin review and are not shown here.

The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine (PubMed)

The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine (PubMed). Maternal anemia and the risk of preterm birth: a meta-analysis.

Open original source

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42692818/

Professional education only

This summary does not replace clinical judgment, facility policy, provider orders, or official guidelines. Verify practice changes against the original source and local protocol.

Related briefs

More updates for this clinical area

Back to Discover

Journal of midwifery & women's health (PubMed)Sep 7, 2026Research Article

A retrospective analysis of US natality data found no statistically significant yearly difference in neonatal mortality between freestanding birth centers and hospitals among term, singleton, vertex births without major medical risk factors from 2015 through 2024.

L&D / OB PedsAI summaryReview source

Research ArticleResearchPatient EducationAI summary · original source linked below

Adjusted neonatal-mortality odds for freestanding birth centers fluctuated around 1.0 across the 10-year study period. No individual year showed a statistically significant difference from hospital births, including 2020 and 2021 when birth-center volume increased.

Key takeaways

The analysis was restricted to births meeting selected low-risk criteria.
The study found no evidence that higher birth-center use during the pandemic years increased neonatal mortality.
The observational design cannot establish that birth setting itself caused the mortality pattern.

Why this matters on shift

The findings add national outcome data for counseling and systems planning around freestanding birth-center care for appropriately selected low-risk pregnancies.

Bedside takeaway

Apply local eligibility, surveillance, escalation, and transfer protocols when caring for planned low-risk birth-center patients.

Nursing implications

Keep eligibility, surveillance, escalation, and transfer decisions anchored to local birth-center criteria and maternal-newborn protocols.

Limitations & cautions

Abstract-only summary. The study used retrospective vital-record data, was limited to selected low-risk births, and cannot exclude residual differences between people who delivered in birth centers and hospitals.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations · exact source links

Journal of midwifery & women's health (PubMed). Neonatal Mortality Risk Among Births in Freestanding Birth Centers, 2015 to 2024.

Open original sourceFull brief

AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (PubMed)Sep 4, 2026Systematic Review

An updated Cochrane review found that long-term hormone-therapy risk profiles differed between combined therapy and estrogen-only therapy.

Med-Surg L&D / OBAI summaryReview source

Systematic ReviewResearchMedication SafetyPatient EducationAI summary · original source linked below

The review included 24 randomized, double-blind trials with 45,660 participants. Most participants were postmenopausal, the mean age in most studies exceeded 60 years, and nearly 70% of the data came from HERS and the Women's Health Initiative.

Key takeaways

Combined therapy probably increased breast-cancer risk and may have increased stroke and venous-thromboembolism risk.
Estrogen-only therapy probably increased stroke and gallbladder-surgery risk while reducing clinical fractures.
Findings were driven largely by older oral regimens and may not represent hormone therapy used today.

Why this matters on shift

Medication reconciliation and patient teaching should account for the specific hormone regimen rather than treating all hormone therapy as one exposure.

Bedside takeaway

Confirm the prescribed formulation and promptly communicate new thromboembolic, neurologic, or gallbladder symptoms through the care team.

Nursing implications

Confirm the prescribed formulation and promptly communicate new thromboembolic, neurologic, or gallbladder symptoms through the care team.

Limitations & cautions

Abstract-only summary. The review addressed therapy lasting at least one year, not short-term symptom relief. Most participants were older than the group most likely to seek treatment for vasomotor symptoms.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations · exact source links

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (PubMed). Long-term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

Open original sourceFull brief

AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Midwifery (PubMed)Aug 17, 2026

A mixed-methods systematic review linked hyperemesis gravidarum and severe nausea and vomiting in pregnancy with substantial psychological burden, including experiences of invalidation and unmet care needs.

L&D / OB PsychAI summaryReview source

Systematic ReviewResearchPatient EducationPractice applicableAI summary · original source linked below

The review integrated 64 international studies: 56 quantitative, six qualitative, and two mixed-methods. Depression and anxiety were generally higher with hyperemesis than in controls and rose with symptom severity; qualitative findings described trauma, disruption to daily life and relationships, dismissal, unmet needs, and the value of specialist and psychological support.

Key takeaways

The review included 64 studies published from 2010 through 2025.
Depression and anxiety were the most frequently assessed psychological outcomes and were generally higher with hyperemesis.
Greater symptom severity was associated with greater depression and anxiety.
Women described invalidation and unmet care needs while valuing specialist services and psychological support.

Why this matters on shift

Hyperemesis is more than a hydration and nutrition problem. Nurses may be the first clinicians to validate the illness, assess psychological distress and safety, and connect a patient with obstetric and mental-health support.

Bedside takeaway

Assess and validate psychological distress alongside hydration, nutrition, and obstetric risk in hyperemesis.

Nursing implications

Assess physical severity and the emotional impact together, use validating language, ask directly about mood, coping, support, and safety, and escalate urgent physical or mental-health concerns through the obstetric pathway. Do not assume distress is proportionate only to visible vomiting or laboratory findings.

Limitations & cautions

The review combined heterogeneous quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies and synthesized quantitative findings narratively rather than reporting a single pooled effect. Associations do not establish that hyperemesis or care experiences caused each psychological outcome.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations · exact source links

Midwifery (PubMed). Experiences of psychological burden and care in women with hyperemesis gravidarum and nausea and vomiting in pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review.

Open original sourceFull brief

AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Key takeaways

Practice implications

Limitations & cautions

Exact source links

More updates for this clinical area

Low-risk birth-center births showed no higher neonatal mortality in a 10-year analysis

Long-term menopausal hormone therapy has formulation-specific benefits and harms

Hyperemesis carried psychological burdens that were shaped by symptom severity and care experiences