This retrospective cohort study attempts to investigate pregnancy complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes in women of advanced maternal age (AMA). Data were extracted from electronic medical records system at West China Second University Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2013 to July 2016. The study cohort consisted 8 subgroups of women on 4 different age levels (20–29 years, 30–34 years, 35–39 years and ≥40 years) and 2 different parities (primiparity and multiparity). In the study period, 38811 women gave birth at our hospital, a randomized block was used to include 2800 women of singleton pregnancy >28 gestational weeks, with 350 patients in each subgroup. Maternal complications and fetal outcomes were collected and defined according to relevant guidelines. Confounding factors representing maternal demographic characteristics were identified from previous studies and analysed in multivariate analysis. There was an increasing trend for the risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes with increasing age, especially in AMA groups. Our study showed that AMA, primiparity, maternal overweight or obesity, lower educational level and residence in rural area increased pregnancy complications and adverse fetal outcomes. Increased professional care as well as public concern is warranted.
Objective. The aim of this study is to measure the reliability and external validity of AMSTAR by applying it to a sample of TCM systematic reviews. Study Design and Methods. We tested the agreement, reliability, construct validity, and feasibility of AMSTAR through comparisons with OQAQ. Statistical analyses were performed by using SPSS 13.0. Results. A random of sample with 41 TCM systematic reviews was selected from a database. The interrater agreement of the individual items of AMSTAR was moderate with a mean kappa of 0.50 (95% CI: 0.26, 0.73). The ICC for AMSTAR against OQAQ (total score of 9 items, excluding item 10) was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.93). Conclusions. Although there is room for improvement on few items, the new tool is reliable, valid, and easy to use for methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews on TCM.
ObjectiveTo explore external validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of hypertension within China from the view of sample representation. MethodsComprehensive literature searches were performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCTR) et al and advanced search strategies were used to locate hypertension RCTs as well as observational studies conducted in China during 1996 to 2009 synchronously. The risk of bias in RCTs and observational studies was assessed by two modified scales respectively, and then both types of studies with 3 or more grading scores were included for the purpose of evaluating of external validity. Following that the study characteristics relative to sample representation were extracted from RCTs and observational studies synchronously, and the later were taken as external references for validating sample representation of RCTs. Results226 hypertension RCTs and 21 observational studies were included for final analysis. Comparing samples with observational studies, the mean age of samples within RCTs was 54.46 years, significantly lower than that of observational studies (66.35 years) (P=0.002). The average disease course in patients of RCTs was 3.89 years and grade III hypertensive patients accounted for 17%; both were lower than that of the observational studies (12.96 years, P<0.001; 34%, P=0.026 respectively). In addition, the proportions of patients with complications due to heart failure, stroke, diabetes, or coronary heart disease in RCTs were 8%, 5%, 12% and 11% correspondingly, all of which were significantly less than that of observational studies (11%, 18%, 17% and 29%). ConclusionSample characteristics within hypertension RCTs were significantly different from those in observational studies. The samples in most RCTs were under-represented. It’s feasible to take samples of observational studies as a mirror of the actual composition of hypertension patients in the real world, if the reporting of observational studies is abundant and available.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.