ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence, risk factors and psychological impact of infertility among females. This review summarises the available evidence, effect estimates and strength of statistical associations between infertility and its risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL and ScienceDirect were searched through 23 January 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria involved studies that reported the psychological impact of infertility among women. We included cross-sectional, case-control and cohort designs, published in the English language, conducted in the community, and performed at health institution levels on prevalence, risk factors and psychological impact of infertility in women. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted and assess the quality of data using the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis. The outcomes were assessed with random-effects model and reported as the OR with 95% CI using the Review Manager software. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies with low risk of bias involving 124 556 women were included. The findings indicated the overall pooled prevalence to be 46.25% and 51.5% for infertility and primary infertility, respectively. Smoking was significantly related to infertility, with the OR of 1.85 (95% CI 1.08 to 3.14) times higher than females who do not smoke. There was a statistical significance between infertility and psychological distress among females, with the OR of 1.63 (95% CI 1.24 to 2.13). A statistical significance was noted between depression and infertility among females, with the OR of 1.40 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.75) compared with those fertile. CONCLUSIONS: The study results highlight an essential and increasing mental disorder among females associated with infertility and may be overlooked. Acknowledging the problem and providing positive, supportive measures to females with infertility ensure more positive outcomes during the therapeutic process. This review is limited by the differences in definitions, diagnostic cut points, study designs and source populations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021226414.
Subject(s)
Infertility , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Status , Humans , Prevalence , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
Introduction: The menopausal transition represents the passage from reproductive to non-reproductive life and is characterized by a number of menstrual disturbances. We systematically reviewed the evidence on the prevalence of psychosomatic and genitourinary syndrome among menopausal women and compared the risk of symptoms between premenopausal, perimenopausal, and post-menopausal women. Methods: We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and ScienceDirect through March 2021. Case series/reports, conference papers and proceedings, articles available only in abstract form, editorial reviews, letters of communication, commentaries, systematic reviews, and qualitative studies were excluded. Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the quality of data using the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis. The outcomes were assessed with random-effects model using the Review Manager software. Results: In total, 29 studies had a low risk of bias and were included in the review. Our findings showed that the pooled prevalence of somatic symptoms in post-menopausal women (52.6%) was higher than in the premenopausal and perimenopausal stages (34.6 and 39.5%, respectively). There was a low prevalence of psychological symptoms in premenopausal women (28.4%). The genitourinary syndrome was highest among post-menopausal women (55.1%), followed by perimenopausal (31.9%) and premenopausal (19.2%) women. Conclusion: Post-menopausal women have a higher risk of experiencing menopausal symptoms particularly genitourinary syndrome than premenopausal and perimenopausal women. It is pertinent for healthcare professionals to evaluate the symptoms in order to provide them with a better quality of life. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021235958.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Over the last two decades, there has been significant growth in public, political, and academic awareness of polygamy. Polygamous families have distinct household problems, usually stemming from jealousy between co-wives over the husband's affections and resources. This study aimed to ascertain the psychological impact of polygamous marriage on women and children worldwide. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Google Scholar, and ProQuest using search terms such as "marriage" and "polygamy." Studies published from the inception of the respective databases until April 2021 were retrieved to assess their eligibility for inclusion in this study. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used for data extraction and the quality assessment of the included studies. The generic inverse variance and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using RevMan software. RESULTS: There were 24 studies fulfilling the eligibility criteria, and 23 studies had a low risk of bias. The pooled meta-analysis showed women in polygamous marriages had a 2.25 (95% CI: 1.20, 4.20) higher chance of experiencing depression than in monogamous marriages. Children with polygamous parents had a significantly higher Global Severity Index with a mean difference of 0.21 (95% CI: 0.10, 0.33) than those with monogamous parents. CONCLUSIONS: The psychological impact of polygamous marriage on women and children was found to be relatively higher than monogamous marriage. Awareness of the proper practices for polygamy should be strengthened so that its adverse effects can be minimized. The agencies involved in polygamous practices should broaden and enhance their understanding of the correct practice of polygamy.
