Prognosis for Live Birth in Women With Recurrent Miscarriage: What Is the Best Measure of Success?
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish a method of estimating the proportion of women with a subsequent live birth after a well-defined time period in an open cohort of women referred to a tertiary recurrent miscarriage clinic. METHODS: We performed a descriptive cohort study with register-based follow-up at a tertiary center for investigation and treatment of recurrent miscarriage in Denmark. All women with primary or secondary recurrent miscarriage referred to the clinic from 1986 to 2008 were included in the study (n=987). Main outcome measures were age-specific and miscarriage-specific proportions of women with a live birth after the first consultation and similar hazard ratios compared with the prognosis in women aged 30-34 years with three miscarriages before the first consultation. RESULTS: Five years after the first consultation, 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 63.7-69.7) had achieved a live birth, increasing to 71.1% (95% CI 68.0-74.2) 15 years after the first consultation. There was a significantly decreased chance of at least one subsequent live birth with increasing maternal age (log-rank P<.01) and increasing number of miscarriages (log-rank P<.01) at first consultation. CONCLUSION: Approximately two thirds of women with recurrent miscarriage referred to a tertiary center succeed in having at least one live birth within 5 years after their first consultation. Our study allows for a descriptive overview of the course of live birth outcome in women with recurrent miscarriage, but not for evaluation of the effect of treatment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The literature search identified nine large cohort studies that reported on miscarriage risk in an aggregated total of 4,638,974 pregnancies.
“Our literature search identified nine large cohort studies that reported on miscarriage risk in an aggregated total of 4,638,974 pregnancies (Table 2). 24-31”
From Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss (2021) · cites this paper as [30]
Based on limited cohort studies, the incidence of miscarriage appears to be increasing in the USA, China and Sweden, but decreasing in Finland.
“Based on limited cohort studies, the incidence of miscarriage appears to be increasing in the USA, 30 China 34 and Sweden 35 , but decreasing in Finland. 28”
From Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss (2021) · cites this paper as [30]
Cites
MIYAKIS, S., LOCKSHIN, M. D., ATSUMI, T., BRANCH, D. W., BREY, R. L., CERVERA, R., DERKSEN, R. H. W. M., DE GROOT, P. G., KOIKE, T., MERONI, P. L., et al. (2006) · Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis · doi:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01753.x · Cited by 7,203 · see citing works
Maternal age and fetal loss: population based register linkage study
Andersen, A.-M. N. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7251.1708 · Cited by 1,690 · see citing works
Self-citation- Statistical Models for Epidemiology
Broemeling, L. D. (2013) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/b15382-9 · Cited by 1,346 · see citing works
Evidence-based guidelines for the investigation and medical treatment of recurrent miscarriage
Jauniaux, E. R. M. (2006) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/del150 · Cited by 521 · see citing works
A longitudinal study of pregnancy outcome following idiopathic recurrent miscarriage
Brigham, S. A., Conlon, C., & Farquharson, R. G. (1999) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/14.11.2868 · Cited by 365 · see citing works
Future pregnancy outcome in unexplained recurrent first trimester miscarriage
Clifford, K., Rai, R., & Regan, L. (1997) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/12.2.387 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Christiansen, O. B., Pedersen, B., Rosgaard, A., & Husth, M. (2002) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/17.3.809 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Self-citationPredicting recurring miscarriage: what is important?
Quenby, S. M., & Farquharson, R. G. (1993) · PubMed · Cited by 132 · see citing works
The Euro-Team Early Pregnancy (ETEP) protocol for recurrent miscarriage
Berry, C. W., Brambati, B., Eskes, T. K. A. B., et al. (1995) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/10.6.1516 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Placebo‐controlled trial of active immunization with third party leukocytes in recurrent miscarriage
Christiansen, O. B., Mathiesen, O., Husth, M., et al. (1994) · Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · doi:10.3109/00016349409023451 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Self-citationCowchock, F. S., & Smith, J. B. (1992) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(11)91690-1 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
The Epidemiology of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss
Christiansen, O. B. (2020) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780429450303-1 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quenby, S., Gallos, I. D., Dhillon-Smith, R. K., Podesek, M., Stephenson, M. D., Fisher, J., Brosens, J. J., Brewin, J., Ramhorst, R., Lucas, E. S., et al. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00682-6 · Cited by 1,560 · see citing works
Self-citationNon-visualized pregnancy losses are prognostically important for unexplained recurrent miscarriage
Kolte, A. M., van Oppenraaij, R. H., Quenby, S., Farquharson, R. G., Stephenson, M., Goddijn, M., & Christiansen, O. B. (2014) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/deu042 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Self-citationBliddal, S., Feldt-Rasmussen, U., Rasmussen, Å. K., Kolte, A. M., Hilsted, L. M., Christiansen, O. B., Nielsen, C. H., & Nielsen, H. S. (2019) · Thyroid® · doi:10.1089/thy.2019.0077 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citationFertility after recurrent miscarriages: results of an observational cohort study
Kling, C., Hedderich, J., & Kabelitz, D. (2018) · Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics · doi:10.1007/s00404-017-4532-4 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lund, M., Kamper-Jørgensen, M., Nielsen, H. S., Lidegaard, Ø., Andersen, A.-M. N., & Christiansen, O. B.
- Affiliations
- Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 37-43
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2099775175
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 2.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Keywords
- recurrent pregnancy loss, subsequent pregnancy outcomes, maternal age
- MeSH terms
- Abortion, Habitual, Adult, Denmark, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Pregnancy, Prognosis, Cohort Studies, Live Birth, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
