Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice, January/February 2015 Nicole S. Carlson

Correspondence Nicole S. Carlson, CNM, University of Colorado Denver, 221 Fayetteville Rd., Decatur, GA 30030, College of Nursing. [email protected] Nicole S. Carlson, CNM, is a doctoral candidate in the College of Nursing, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO.

Translation of Evidence-Based Findings to Your Clinical Practice Published simultaneously in the Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 60(1). n the past few issues of this column, we have discussed the first two steps of the 5A Model for the individual practitioner’s use of evidence-based information (Ask, Acquire, Appraise, Apply and Assess). Once a health care practitioner has identified an important clinical question and acquired the evidence-based literature to help answer that question, the third step, Appraise, is often the most intimidating one for professionals with little research training. Appraisal of a research publication involves reading the evidence and deciding how valid and applicable it is to the clinical question at hand.


The basis of most evidence-based care is the systematic review, a format that allows for the synthesis of many separate investigations on a particular subject into statistically robust results (Fleming, Koletsi, Seehra, & Pandis, 2014). When performed in accordance with the highest standards, systematic reviews have protocols and objectives that are well-defined and reproducible (Villar et al., 2002). Results are clearly presented for ease of interpretation and are updated regularly as new investigations are published. Standards for the preparation of reports of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses have been published. The Preferred Reporting for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines consist of a 27-item checklist and flow diagram that include the minimum set of items for reporting of quality systematic reviews (PRISMA Statement Website, n.d.). Unfortunately, many systematic reviews do not meet high-quality standards (Fleming et al., 2014). Authors of a recent comparison of the methodologic quality of systematic reviews concluded that reviews published in clinical journals with

greater impact factors (IFs) were performed in more rigorous manners (0.68% more rigorous per one IF unit [95% CI 0.32–1.04]) (Fleming et al, 2014). Selective reporting of results and failure to publish negative results have also been shown to occur, even among the most rigorous of clinical studies, the registered clinical trial (Korevaar, Ochodo, Bossuyt, & Hooft, 2014). Many clinicians read only the abstract and conclusions sections of many publications in an effort to quickly identify information of use in their practices. Unfortunately, conclusions may not be representative of actual study results; instead, conclusions may serve merely as the expert opinion of the authors in the absence of evidence (Villar et al., 2002). How should busy clinicians handle these problems as they attempt to appraise the evidence base? First, it is helpful for clinicians to have some type of training in evidence base interpretation. Table 1 provides links for several free training modules with information on the appraisal of clinical studies. These resources focus on teaching health care practitioners strategies for rapidly appraising the evidence base in formats that are quick and accessible. Once practitioners have some knowledge of how to appraise the literature, the next step in making the evidence base more accessible is for the editors and peer reviewers of major scientific journals to demand more transparency of manuscript authors. For example, some experts are suggesting that perhaps conclusion sections of systematic reviews might be better discarded or reformatted so that the results can be presented more clearly (Villar et al., 2002). Practitioners should be aware of the PRISMA guidelines for the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and use these guidelines to help spot problems with studies before translating that research into practice (Fleming et al., 2014). All of this work can be daunting, but is an essential part of bringing truly current and optimized care to women, infants, and families.

The author reports no conflict of interest or relevant financial relationships.

 C 2014 AWHONN, the Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses



Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice

Table 1: Training for the Appraisal of Scientific Studies Provider Evidence-Based Behavioral



Offers modules for continuing education


credit to nurses and nurse practitioners on a wide variety of evidence-based training, including critical appraisal.

Centre for Evidence-Based

Offers multiple resources, including a


downloadable, 1-day do-it-yourself workshop on evidence-based practice.

National Institutes of Health,

Library of Medicine


Provides list of evidence-based practice tools, including several tutorials for health care practitioners.

References Fleming, P. S., Koletsi, D., Seehra, J., & Pandis, N. (2014). Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of

Updated Systematic Reviews in CDSR: Women’s Health


higher quality. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(7), 754–759. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.002 Korevaar, D. A., Ochodo, E. A., Bossuyt, P. M., & Hooft, L. (2014). Publication and reporting of test accuracy studies registered in Clinical Chemistry, 60(4), 651–659. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2013.218149

r r

PRISMA Statement Website. (n.d.). Welcome to the PRISMA statement

Evaluation of follow-up strategies for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer following completion of primary treatment Vaginal dilator therapy for women receiving pelvic radiotherapy Antigen-specific active immunotherapy for ovarian cancer

website. Retrieved from Villar, J., Gulmezoglu, A. M., Carroli, G., Schulz, K. F., Lumbiganon, P., Mittal, S., . . . Cheng, L. (2002). Is it time to do away with conclusions in systematic reviews? Geneva: Switzerland. World Health Organization. Retrieved from http://webcache.

Updated Systematic Reviews in CDSR: Pregnancy and Birth

r %2520with%2520conclusions%2520in%2520systematic% 2520reviews.pdf±&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

From Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) Issues 8 & 9, 2014 New Systematic Reviews in CDSR: Women’s Health

r r r

Vitrification versus slow freezing for women undergoing oocyte cryopreservation Surgical intervention versus expectant management for endometrial polyps in subfertile women Oral antiviral therapy for prevention of genital herpes outbreaks in immunocompetent and nonpregnant patients

New Systematic Reviews in CDSR: Pregnancy and Birth



Hypnosis for induction of labor

JOGNN, 44, 93-99; 2015. DOI: 10.1111/1552-6909.12521


Vaginal preparation with antiseptic solution before cesarean section for preventing postoperative infections Skin preparation for preventing infection following cesarean section

From the Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects (DARE) Recent Abstract Entries Assessing Quality of Systematic Reviews: Pregnancy and Birth.


The safety of acupuncture during pregnancy: a systematic review

From the Joanna Briggs Institute Database Recent Abstract Entries Assessing Quality of Systematic Reviews: Pregnancy and Birth

r r

Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section: short and long-term outcomes Women’s experience of diabetes and diabetes management in pregnancy: a systematic review of qualitative literature


Carlson, N. S.


The effectiveness and maternal satisfaction of breastfeeding support for women from disadvantaged groups: a comprehensive systematic review Influenza vaccination during pregnancy: a systematic review of effectiveness and safety

known to be multi-factorial in nature (Boden, Varcoe, & Kennaway, 2013), and authors did attempt to control final results for other variables known to alter menstrual patterns, infertility, and spontaneous early pregnancy loss, such as age, race, caffeine, body mass index, smoking, partner variables, and parity.

Recent Abstract Entries Assessing Quality of Systematic Reviews: Neonatal

Some differences among groups used as comparison groups in the included studies may have altered results. For example, authors in some of the studies (8/15) were careful to use women for comparison who had the same job function, yet worked daylight shifts. However, authors of other studies used comparison groups of women working in different occupations (3/15 studies), and authors of four studies used comparison groups of women who did not work. Another limitation of the review is that outcomes were collected from women’s self-report rather than from clinical documentation; thus, these results may be limited by errors in recall or report. For example, authors indicated that women were more likely to drop out of the included studies if they had early spontaneous pregnancy losses.



The effectiveness of music on pain among preterm infants in the NICU: a systematic review

Featured Review: Stocker, L. J., Mackon, N. S., Cheong, Y. C., & Bewley, S. J. (2014). Influence of shift work on early reproductive outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 124, 9–110. Currently, shift work involving hours outside the 8am to 6pm period is common among workers in health care and other occupations. It is estimated that nearly 20% of women who work do so outside of standard business hours (Office of National Statistics, 2011). It is known that women working on alternative schedules for long periods of time (>30 years) are at increased risk for breast cancer (Grundy et al., 2013), and shift work is also known to increase the risk for preterm birth, low birth weight, and fetal loss (Knutsson, 2003). This review was conducted to investigate evidence addressing the riskiness of shift work on early reproductive outcomes. Menstrual cycle disruption (cycles less than 25 days or greater than 31 days), infertility (time to pregnancy interval of greater than 12 months), and spontaneous pregnancy loss before 25 weeks gestation were the three outcomes evaluated in this review of observational studies. Overall, alternative shift work was found to be associated with a slightly increased rate of menstrual disruption (adjusted OR 1.15 [95%CI 1.01–1.31]) but not early spontaneous pregnancy loss (OR 0.96 [95%CI 0.88–1.05]) or infertility (adjusted OR 1.11 [95%CI 0.86–1.44]). Night shift work in particular was associated with a modestly increased risk of early spontaneous pregnancy loss (adjusted OR 1.4 [95%CI 1.22–1.63]).

Comment: As a review of observational studies, this article represents only the association between shift work and increased risks in early pregnancy. Until future prospective, randomized controlled studies are performed, authors of this review caution against health care providers recommending that women stop shift work to avoid these outcomes. However, this review is one more source of evidence suggesting that shift work among women is an important topic for future, rigorous investigation in relation to poor obstetric and gynecologic outcomes.

References Boden, M. J., Varcoe, T. J., & Kennaway, D. J. (2013). Circadian regulation of reproduction: From gamete to offspring. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 113(3), 387–397. doi: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2013.01.003 Grundy, A., Richardson, H., Burstyn, I., Lohrisch, C., SenGupta, S. K., Lai, A. S., . . . Aronson, K. J. (2013). Increased risk of breast cancer associated with long-term shift work in Canada. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 70(12), 831–838. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2013-101482 Knutsson, A. (2003). Health disorders of shift workers. Occupational

A total of 15 studies were included in this review (n = 123,403 women). All studies included were rated as high quality using the Cochrane Collaboration’s recommended Newcastle-Ottawa scale with exception of two studies rated as mediumquality. The outcomes reported in this review are

JOGNN 2015; Vol. 44, Issue 1

Medicine, 53(2), 103–108. Office of National Statistics. (2011). Changes in shift work patterns over the last ten years (1999–2009). London, UK: Health and Safety Executive.

Featured Review: Hadiati, D. R., Hakimi, M., Nurdiati, D. S., & Ota, E. (2014). Skin preparation



for preventing infection following caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 9, CD007462. And Hass, D. M., Morgan, S., & Contreras, K. (2014). Vaginal preparation with antiseptic solution before cesarean section for preventing postoperative infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 9, CD007892. Cesarean is the most common surgical procedure in the United States, yet surprisingly the techniques of this procedure can vary widely from provider to provider, and few techniques are based on high-quality evidence (Encarnacion & Zlatnik, 2012). In response to a call for more evidence-based information on cesarean procedures and techniques (Encarnacion & Zlatnik, 2012), the Cochrane Collaboration recently released two reviews addressing vaginal and abdominal preoperative skin preparation for cesarean birth. Although abdominal skin preparation prior to cesarean of some form is commonly practiced in the United States, Hadiati et al. reviewed six trials (n = 1,522 women) related to infection rates following surgery with different types of antiseptic preparation. This review was an update of a 2013 Cochrane review on the same subject (Dumville, McFarlane, Edwards, Lipp, & Holmes, 2013), but the authors included a broader list of postoperative infections as outcomes (wound infections plus metritis/endometritis). Hadiati et al. agreed with the earlier researchers that 0.5% chlorhexidine skin preparation was superior to alcohol-based povidone iodine with lower rates of bacterial growth 18 hours after surgery (RR 0.23 [95%CI 0.07–0.70]). In addition, they found no difference in postoperative endometritis rates when comparing alcohol scrub to iodophor scrub (RR 1.62, [95%CI 0.29–9.16]) or when comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone (RR 0.88, [95%CI 0.56–1.38]). However, the evidence for these findings was of low quality, and the authors called for future research that might reveal optimal antiseptic type, timing of antiseptic application (prior to surgery vs. night before surgery), and application methods. Unlike abdominal skin preparation, vaginal antiseptic preparation prior to cesarean is a newer recommendation and may not be practiced as widely. Hass, Morgan, & Contreras reported on an


JOGNN, 44, 93-99; 2015. DOI: 10.1111/1552-6909.12521

Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice

updated review of five trials (n = 1,946 women) to evaluate the effect of vaginal cleansing with povidone-iodine prior to surgery on the rates of post-cesarean endometritis. The results of this review support the use of vaginal antisepsis prior to cesarean: endometritis was reduced in all women who received the cleansing compared to those who did not (RR 0.39 [95%CI 0.16–0.97]) and was especially reduced among women who had cesareans after ruptured membranes (RR 0.13 [95%CI 0.02–0.66]). Comment: Investigators in these Cochrane reviews discussed the need for high-quality, welldesigned, randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes to provide better evidence for optimal procedures to control infection during cesareans. Postoperative infection is 5- 20 times more common following cesarean than vaginal birth and is an important contributor to maternal morbidity (Gibbs, 1980). Although most women having cesareans in the United States receive prophylactic antibiotics (Doss et al., 2012), the use of topical antiseptics is an important additional precaution to further deter post-surgical infection. With more than one third of women in the United States undergoing cesareans each year, it is important that this surgery is avoided when possible and made less risky when necessary.

References Doss, A. E., Davidson, J. D., Cliver, S. P., Wetta, L. A., Andrews, W. W., & Tita, A. T. (2012). Antibiotic prophylaxis for cesarean delivery: Survey of maternal-fetal medicine physicians in the U.S. Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 25(8), 1264–1266. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2011.605485 Dumville,










Holmes, A. (2013). Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing







Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 3, CD003949. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003949.pub3 Encarnacion, B., & Zlatnik, M. G. (2012). Cesarean delivery technique: Evidence or tradition? A review of the evidence-based cesarean delivery. Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 67(8), 483–494. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e318267699f Gibbs, R. S. (1980). Clinical risk factors for puerperal infection. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 55(5 Suppl), 178S-184S.

Evidence-Based Reviews from Other Sources Recent Evidence-Based Reviews: Women’s Health Burstein, H. J., Temin, S., Anderson, H., Buchholz, T. A., Davidson, N. E., Gelmon, K. E., . . . Griggs, J. J. (2014). Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive

Carlson, N. S.

breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline focused update. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 32(21), 2255–2269. doi: 10.1200/jco.2013.54.2258 Diepstraten, S. C., Sever, A. R., Buckens, C. F., Veldhuis, W. B., van Dalen, T., van den Bosch, M. A., . . . Verkooijen, H. M. (2014). Value of preoperative ultrasoundguided axillary lymph node biopsy for preventing completion axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 21(1), 51–59. doi: 10.1245/s10434–013– 3229–6 Dolman, L., Sauvaget, C., Muwonge, R., & Sankaranarayanan, R. (2014). Meta-analysis of the efficacy of cold coagulation as a treatment method for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A systematic review. BJOG, 121(8), 929–942. doi: 10.1111/1471–0528.12655 Friedman, M. R., Wei, C., Klem, M. L., Silvestre, A. J., Markovic, N., & Stall, R. (2014). HIV infection and sexual risk among men who have sex with men and women (MSMW): A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS One, 9(1), e87139. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087139 Fu, L. Y., Dai, L. M., Li, X. G., Zhang, K., & Bai, Y. (2014). Association of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene C677T polymorphism with polycystic ovary syndrome risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis update. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 172, 56–61. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.10.001 Goossens, J., Delbaere, I., Van Lancker, A., Beeckman, D., Verhaeghe, S., & Van Hecke, A. (2014). Cancer patients’ and professional caregivers’ needs, preferences and factors associated with receiving and providing fertility-related information: A mixedmethods systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 51(2), 300–319. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.06.015 Hall, M., Chappell, L. C., Parnell, B. L., Seed, P. T., & Bewley, S. (2014). Associations between intimate partner violence and termination of pregnancy: A systematic review and metaanalysis. PLoS Medicine, 11(1), e1001581. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001581 Han, B., Li, X., & Yu, T. (2014). Cruciferous vegetables consumption and the risk of ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Diagnostic Pathology, 9, 7. doi: 10.1186/1746– 1596–9–7 Maman, K., Aballea, S., Nazir, J., Desroziers, K., Neine, M. E., Siddiqui, E., . . . Hakimi,

JOGNN 2015; Vol. 44, Issue 1


Z. (2014). Comparative efficacy and safety of medical treatments for the management of overactive bladder: A systematic literature review and mixed treatment comparison. European Urology, 65(4), 755–765. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.010 Matsuda, A., Yamaoka, K., Tango, T., Matsuda, T., & Nishimoto, H. (2014). Effectiveness of psychoeducational support on quality of life in early-stage breast cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Quality of Life Research, 23(1), 21–30. doi: 10.1007/s11136–013–0460–3 Nelson, H. D., Pappas, M., Zakher, B., Mitchell, J. P., Okinaka-Hu, L., & Fu, R. (2014). Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: A systematic review to update the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 160(4), 255–266. doi: 10.7326/m13–1684 Olesen, T. B., Svahn, M. F., Faber, M. T., Duun-Henriksen, A. K., Junge, J., Norrild, B., & Kjaer, S. K. (2014). Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecologic Oncology, 134(1), 206–215. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.02.040 Palomba, S., Falbo, A., & La Sala, G. B. (2014). Metformin and gonadotropins for ovulation induction in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, 12, 3. doi: 10.1186/1477–7827–12–3 Polanski, L. T., Barbosa, M. A., Martins, W. P., Baumgarten, M. N., Campbell, B., Brosens, J., . . . Raine-Fenning, N. (2014). Interventions to improve reproductive outcomes in women with elevated natural killer cells undergoing assisted reproduction techniques: A systematic review of literature. Human Reproduction, 29(1), 65– 75. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det414 Schimpf, M. O., Rahn, D. D., Wheeler, T. L., Patel, M., White, A. B., Orejuela, F. J., . . . Sung, V. W. (2014). Sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: A systematic review and metaanalysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 211(1), 71.e71–71.e27. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.030 Shohel, M., Rahman, M. M., Zaman, A., Uddin, M. M., Al-Amin, M. M., & Reza, H. M. (2014). A systematic review of effectiveness and safety of different regimens of levonorgestrel oral tablets for emergency contraception. BMC Women’s Health, 14, 54. doi: 10.1186/1472–6874–14–54



Stalgaitis, C., & Glick, S. N. (2014). The use of web-based diaries in sexual risk behaviour research: A systematic review. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 90(5), 374–381. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2013–051472 Stocker, L. J., Macklon, N. S., Cheong, Y. C., & Bewley, S. J. (2014). Influence of shift work on early reproductive outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 124(1), 99–110. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000000321 van Meurs, H. S., van Lonkhuijzen, L. R., Limpens, J., van der Velden, J., & Buist, M. R. (2014). Hormone therapy in ovarian granulosa cell tumors: A systematic review. Gynecologic Oncology, 134(1), 196–205. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.03.573 Wang, J., Gao, J., Yao, H., Wu, Z., Wang, M., & Qi, J. (2014). Diagnostic accuracy of serum HE4, CA125 and ROMA in patients with ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis. Tumour Biology, 35(6), 6127–6138. doi: 10.1007/s13277–014–1811–6 Woods, N. F., Mitchell, E. S., Schnall, J. G., Cray, L., Ismail, R., Taylor-Swanson, L., & Thomas, A. (2014). Effects of mind-body therapies on symptom clusters during the menopausal transition. Climacteric, 17(1), 10– 22. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2013.828198 Zhong, S., Jiang, T., Ma, T., Zhang, X., Tang, J., Chen, W., . . . Zhao, J. (2014). Association between physical activity and mortality in breast cancer: A meta-analysis of cohort studies. European Journal of Epidemiology, 29(6), 391–404. doi: 10.1007/s10654–014–9916–1 Zou, L. Y., Yang, L., He, X. L., Sun, M., & Xu, J. J. (2014). Effects of aerobic exercise on cancerrelated fatigue in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: A meta-analysis. Tumour Biology, 35(6), 5659–5667. doi: 10.1007/s13277– 014–1749–8

Recent Evidence-Based Reviews: Pregnancy & Birth Backes, C. H., Rivera, B. K., Haque, U., Bridge, J. A., Smith, C. V., Hutchon, D. J., & Mercer, J. S. (2014). Placental transfusion strategies in very preterm neonates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 124(1), 47–56. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000000324 Been, J. V., Lugtenberg, M. J., Smets, E., van Schayck, C. P., Kramer, B. W., Mommers, M., & Sheikh, A. (2014). Preterm birth and childhood wheezing disorders: A systematic re-


JOGNN, 44, 93-99; 2015. DOI: 10.1111/1552-6909.12521

Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice

view and meta-analysis. PLoS Medicine, 11(1), e1001596. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001596 Bergenhenegouwen, L. A., Meertens, L. J., Schaaf, J., Nijhuis, J. G., Mol, B. W., Kok, M., & Scheepers, H. C. (2014). Vaginal delivery versus caesarean section in preterm breech delivery: A systematic review. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 172, 1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.10.017 Berhan, Y., & Berhan, A. (2014). A metaanalysis of reverse breech extraction to deliver a deeply impacted head during cesarean delivery. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 124(2), 99–105. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.08.014 Du, Y., Ye, M., & Zheng, F. (2014). Active management of the third stage of labor with and without controlled cord traction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 93(7), 626–633. doi: 10.1111/aogs.12424 Fonseca, A. L., Schuster, K. M., Kaplan, L. J., Maung, A. A., Lui, F. Y., & Davis, K. A. (2014). The use of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of suspected appendicitis in pregnancy: Shortened length of stay without increase in hospital charges. JAMA Surgery, 149(7), 687–693. doi: 1 0.1001/jamasurg.2013.4658 Hofmeyr, G. J., Belizan, J. M., & von Dadelszen, P. (2014). Low-dose calcium supplementation for preventing pre-eclampsia: A systematic review and commentary. BJOG, 121(8), 951–957. doi: 10.1111/1471–0528.12613 Huang, H., Coleman, S., Bridge, J. A., Yonkers, K., & Katon, W. (2014). A meta-analysis of the relationship between antidepressant use in pregnancy and the risk of preterm birth and low birth weight. General Hospital Psychiatry, 36(1), 13– 18. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.08.002 Liu, P., Xu, L., Sun, Y., & Wang, Z. (2014). The prevalence and risk of human papillomavirus infection in pregnant women. Epidemiology and Infection, 142(8), 1567–1578. doi: 10.1017/s0950268814000636 Mills, T. A., Ricklesford, C., Cooke, A., Heazell, A. E., Whitworth, M., & Lavender, T. (2014). Parents’ experiences and expectations of care in pregnancy after stillbirth or neonatal death: A metasynthesis. BJOG, 121(8), 943–950. doi: 10.1111/1471–0528.12656 Miniati, M., Callari, A., Calugi, S., Rucci, P., Savino, M., Mauri, M., & Dell’Osso, L. (2014). Interpersonal psychotherapy for postpartum

Carlson, N. S.

depression: A systematic review. Archive of Women’s Mental Health, 17(4), 257–268. doi: 10.1007/s00737–014–0442–7 Mishanina, E., Rogozinska, E., Thatthi, T., UddinKhan, R., Khan, K. S., & Meads, C. (2014). Use of labour induction and risk of cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 186(9), 665–673. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.130925 Pereira, P. F., Alfenas Rde, C., & Araujo, R. M. (2014). Does breastfeeding influence the risk of developing diabetes mellitus in children? A review of current evidence. Jornal de Pediatr´ıa, 90(1), 7–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jped.2013.02.024 Pirie, D. A., Al Wattar, B. H., Pirie, A. M., Houston, V., Siddiqua, A., Doug, M., . . . Thangaratinam, S. (2014). Effects of monitoring strategies on seizures in pregnant women on lamotrigine: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 172, 26–31. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.10.021 Sonnenschein-van der Voort, A. M., Arends, L. R., de Jongste, J. C., Annesi-Maesano, I., Arshad, S. H., Barros, H., . . . Duijts, L. (2014). Preterm birth, infant weight gain, and childhood asthma risk: A meta-analysis of 147,000 European children. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 133(5), 1317–1329. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.12.1082 Thombs, B. D., Arthurs, E., Coronado-Montoya, S., Roseman, M., Delisle, V. C., Leavens, A., . . . Zelkowitz, P. (2014). Depression screening and patient outcomes in pregnancy or postpartum: A systematic review. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 76(6), 433–446. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.01.006 van Gelder, M. M., de Jong-van den Berg, L. T., & Roeleveld, N. (2014). Drugs

JOGNN 2015; Vol. 44, Issue 1


associated with teratogenic mechanisms. Part II: A literature review of the evidence on human risks. Human Reproduction, 29(1), 168–183. doi: 10.1093/humrep/ det370 Vos, A. A., Posthumus, A. G., Bonsel, G. J., Steegers, E. A., & Denktas, S. (2014). Deprived neighborhoods and adverse perinatal outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 93(8), 727–740. doi: 10.1111/aogs. 12430

Recent Evidence-Based Reviews: Neonatal Ibrahim, M., Ho, S. K., & Yeo, C. L. (2014). Restrictive versus liberal red blood cell transfusion thresholds in very low birth weight infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 50(2), 122–130. doi: 10.1111/jpc.12409 Seale, J., & Millar, M. (2014). Perinatal vertical transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria: a systematic review and proposed research strategy. BJOG, 121(8), 923–928. doi: 10.1111/1471–0528.12746 Zhang, P., Lavoie, P. M., Lacaze-Masmonteil, T., Rhainds, M., & Marc, I. (2014). Omega-3 longchain polyunsaturated fatty acids for extremely preterm infants: A systematic review. Pediatrics, 134(1), 120–134. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014–0459 Zhou, Y. B., Li, H. T., Zhu, L. P., & Liu, J. M. (2014). Impact of cesarean section on placental transfusion and iron-related hematological indices in term neonates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Placenta, 35(1), 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2013.10.011


February 2015.

February 2015. - PDF Download Free
117KB Sizes 0 Downloads 11 Views