PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the associations between birth spacing and developmental outcomes in early childhood (3-10 years of age). Studies examining the associations between interpregnancy intervals and child development outcomes during and beyond the perinatal period have not been systematically reviewed.
UNASSIGNED: We searched Ovid/MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Educational Source, Research Starters, ERIC, Scopus, PubMed, Social Science Research Network database, and ProQuest\'s Social Sciences Databases for relevant articles published between 1 January 1989 and 25 June 2021. Studies published in English, conducted in populations residing in high-income countries with any measure of birth spacing, and child development outcomes among children aged <10 years were included. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies and extracted data on the study design, setting and population, birth spacing, outcomes, and results.
UNASSIGNED: The search yielded 1,556 records, of which seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Five of these seven studies used birth intervals as the exposure measure. Definitions of exposure differed between the studies. Three studies reported an association between short birth spacing and poorer child development outcomes, and two studies reported an association between long birth spacing and poorer child development outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Currently, limited evidence suggests that the adverse effects of sub-optimal birth spacing are observable beyond infancy.
UNASSIGNED: We searched Ovid/MEDLINE, Global Health, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Educational Source, Research Starters, ERIC, Scopus, PubMed, Social Science Research Network database, and ProQuest\'s Social Sciences Databases for relevant articles published between 1 January 1989 and 25 June 2021. Studies published in English, conducted in populations residing in high-income countries with any measure of birth spacing, and child development outcomes among children aged <10 years were included. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies and extracted data on the study design, setting and population, birth spacing, outcomes, and results.
UNASSIGNED: The search yielded 1,556 records, of which seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Five of these seven studies used birth intervals as the exposure measure. Definitions of exposure differed between the studies. Three studies reported an association between short birth spacing and poorer child development outcomes, and two studies reported an association between long birth spacing and poorer child development outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Currently, limited evidence suggests that the adverse effects of sub-optimal birth spacing are observable beyond infancy.
摘要：
UNASSIGNED：本研究旨在系统回顾有关幼儿（3-10岁）出生间隔与发育结局之间关联的文献。尚未对围产期及以后的妊娠间隔与儿童发育结果之间的关系进行系统审查。
未经批准：我们搜索了Ovid/MEDLINE，全球卫生,PsycINFO,EMBASE,CINAHLPlus,教育来源,研究入门,ERIC,Scopus,PubMed,社会科学研究网络数据库，和ProQuest的社会科学数据库在1989年1月1日至2021年6月25日期间发表的相关文章。研究发表在英文,在居住在高收入国家的人口中进行，以任何生育间隔衡量，包括<10岁儿童的儿童发育结果。两位作者独立评估了研究的资格，并提取了研究设计的数据。背景和人口，出生间隔,结果，和结果。
未经评估：搜索产生了1,556条记录，其中7项研究符合纳入标准。这七项研究中有五项使用出生间隔作为暴露措施。研究之间的暴露定义不同。三项研究报告了出生间隔短与儿童发育结果较差之间的关联，两项研究报告了出生间隔长和儿童发育结局差之间的关联.
未经评估：目前，有限的证据表明,出生间隔次优的不利影响在婴儿期以后是可以观察到的.
未经批准：我们搜索了Ovid/MEDLINE，全球卫生,PsycINFO,EMBASE,CINAHLPlus,教育来源,研究入门,ERIC,Scopus,PubMed,社会科学研究网络数据库，和ProQuest的社会科学数据库在1989年1月1日至2021年6月25日期间发表的相关文章。研究发表在英文,在居住在高收入国家的人口中进行，以任何生育间隔衡量，包括<10岁儿童的儿童发育结果。两位作者独立评估了研究的资格，并提取了研究设计的数据。背景和人口，出生间隔,结果，和结果。
未经评估：搜索产生了1,556条记录，其中7项研究符合纳入标准。这七项研究中有五项使用出生间隔作为暴露措施。研究之间的暴露定义不同。三项研究报告了出生间隔短与儿童发育结果较差之间的关联，两项研究报告了出生间隔长和儿童发育结局差之间的关联.
未经评估：目前，有限的证据表明,出生间隔次优的不利影响在婴儿期以后是可以观察到的.
