OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and the safety of progestogens in the treatment of threatened miscarriage.

SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (8 August 2017) and reference lists of retrieved trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, quasi-randomised or cluster-randomised controlled trials, that compared progestogen with placebo, no treatment or any other treatment for the treatment of threatened miscarriage in women carrying singleton pregnancy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors assessed the trials for inclusion in the review, assessed trial quality and extracted the data and graded the body of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials (involving 696 participants) in this update of the review. The included trials were conducted in different countries, covering the full spectrum of the World Bank's economic classification, which enhances the applicability of evidence drawn from this review. Two trials were conducted in Germany and Italy which are high-income countries, while four trials were conducted in upper-middle income countries; two in Iran, one in Malaysia and the fourth in Turkey, and the seventh trial was conducted in Jordan, which is a lower-middle income country. In six trials all the participants met the inclusion criteria and in the seventh study, we included in the meta-analysis only the subgroup of participants who met the inclusion criteria. We assessed the body of evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE tool and the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Downgrading of evidence was based on the high risk of bias in six of the seven included trials and a small number of events and wide confidence intervals for some outcomes.Treatment of miscarriage with progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment probably reduces the risk of miscarriage; (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.87; 7 trials; 696 women; moderate-quality evidence). Treatment with oral progestogen compared to no treatment also probably reduces the miscarriage rate (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.85; 3 trials; 408 women; moderate-quality evidence). However treatment with vaginal progesterone compared to placebo, probably has little or no effect in reducing the miscarriage rate (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.21; 4 trials; 288 women; moderate-quality evidence). The subgroup interaction test indicated no difference according to route of administration between the oral and vaginal subgroups of progesterone.Treatment of preterm birth with the use of progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment may have little or no effect in reducing the rate of preterm birth (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.44; 5 trials; 588 women; low-quality evidence).We are uncertain if treatment of threatened miscarriage with progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment has any effect on the rate of congenital abnormalities because the quality of the evidence is very low (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.10 to 4.82; 2 trials; 337 infants; very-low quality evidence).

METHODS: A case-control study was conducted by interviewing 350 women who were admitted to the university gynaecological unit for spontaneous abortion and 350 women who delivered normally at the university obstetric unit. Odds ratios, as the estimators of relative risks, were calculated.

RESULTS: The relative risk for spontaneous abortion among women in the age-group 30 to 39 years was 1.61 and among women above 40 years of age was 3.68 when compared to those below 30 years of age. In relation to career women, the relative risk of spontaneous abortion for housewives was 0.45. Ethnic group, parity, subfertility, previous induced abortion, ectopic pregnancy, contraception and menarcheal age did not influence the risk of spontaneous abortion.

AIM: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of obesity among adult women in Selangor and to determine factors associated with obesity among these women.

METHODS: This community based cross sectional study was conducted in Selangor in January 2004. Multi stage stratified proportionate to size sampling method was used. Women aged 20-59 years old were included in this study. Data was collected using a questionnaire-guided interview method. The questionnaire consisted of questions on socio-demographic (age, ethnicity, religion, education level, occupation, monthly income, marital status), Obstetric & Gynaecology history, body mass index (BMI), and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).

RESULTS: Out of 1032 women, 972 agreed to participate in this study, giving a response rate of 94.2%. The mean age was 37.91 +/- 10.91. The prevalence of obesity among the respondents was 16.7% (mean = 1.83 +/- 0.373). Obesity was found to be significantly associated with age (p = 0.013), ethnicity (p = 0.001), religion (p = 0.002), schooling (p = 0.020), educational level (p = 0.016), marital status (p = 0.001) and the history of suffering a miscarriage within the past 6 months (p = 0.023).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study evaluated the inter-observer variability in diagnosis of CHM, PHM and HA according to defined histologic criteria. Ninety abortus conception specimens were reviewed. Representative haematoxylin and eosin-stained slides were assigned independently to two pathologists who were asked to make a diagnosis of CHM, PHM or HA, and provide a report of the identified diagnostic histological criteria. Kappa value was calculated for the inter-observer agreement.

RESULTS: There was a total of 36.7% disagreement between two pathologists (K = 0.403, Strength of Agreement = moderate), of which 24.4% and 12.2%, were differentiating PHM from CHM and PHM from HA, respectively. Among defined diagnostic histological criteria, the highest rate of agreement was observed in the identification of cistern formation and hydropic changes (K = 0.746 and 0.686 respectively, Strength of Agreement = substantial).