Table 3

 Lifting, physical activity and risk of preterm delivery

First author (year)Numbers in analysisRR (95% CI)ExposureHigher potential forIncomplete reporting
ComparisonTimingBiasConfounding
x/day, times per day; x/wk, times per week.
RR is used generically to encompass a variety of published effect measures (odds ratios, incidence density ratios, hazard ratios, etc).
*Effective response rate <50%.
Lifting
    Cohort studies
        Ahlborg GJ (1990)533891.29 (0.69 to 2.4)⩾12 kg >50 x/wk vs noneNot statedNoNoNo
        Brink-Henriksen T (1995)1034100.93 (0.45 to 1.75)Lifting ⩾12 kg ⩾10 x/d vs never16 weeksNoNoNo
        Magann EF (2005)263181.14 (0.32 to 3.18)Lifting ⩾11 kg >6 x/hTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Misra DP (1998)3211661.49 (0.61 to 3.28)Lifting heavy objects on the job (yes vs no)Trimesters 1 and 2NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3811761.3 (0.9 to 1.8)Lifting ⩾25 lbs ⩾13 vs 0 x/wkTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3811761.3 (0.8 to 2.1)Lifting ⩾25 lbs ⩾13 vs 0 x/wkTrimester 2NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3811761.3 (0.6 to 2.9)Lifting ⩾25 lbs ⩾13 vs 0 x/wkTrimester 3NoNoNo
        Tuntiseranee P (1998)5211080.9 (0.4 to 2.1)>12 kg, 1–10 x/d vs none15–28 weeksNoNoNo
    Case–control studies
        Berkowitz GS (1983)72310.81 (0.43 to 1.49)Lifting on the jobNot statedNoYesNo
        Saurel-Cubizolles MJ (2004)4547861.02 (0.8 to 1.2)Loads carried >20 kg vs noneTrimester 1NoNoNo
    Cross-sectional studies
        Fortier I (1995)1330780.87 (0.52 to 1.45)⩾10 kg vs noneNot statedNoNoNo
        McDonald AD (1988)29227611.25, p<0.01Lifting heavy weights ⩾15 vs <15 x/dNot statedNoNoNo
        Saurel-Cubizolles MJ (1987)4322621.35 (0.77 to 2.24)Carrying of heavy loads (yes vs no)Trimester 1NoYesNo
        Saurel-Cubizolles MJ (1991)448741.31 (0.64 to 2.58)Lifting heavy loads (often/always vs none/sometimesNot statedNoNoNo
Physical activity
    Cohort studies
        Hickey CA (1995)176120.7 (0.41 to 1.18)Occupational fatigue score (⩾3 vs <3)24–26 weeksNoNoNo
        Klebanoff MA (1990)2171001.04 (0.76 to 1.42)Heavy work ⩾4 vs 0 h/d1–5 monthsNoNoNo
        Launer LJ (1990)2341681.11 (0.77 to 1.62)Manual vs office workNot statedNoNoNo
        Magann EF (1996)255311.26 (0.64 to 2.6)>2900 vs <2300 kcal/d energy expenditure16–18 weeksNoYesNo
        Newman RB (2001)3312181.17 (1.01 to 1.35)Physical activity score22–24 weeksNoNoNo
        Rao S (2003)405080.8 (0.4 to 1.6)High vs low activity18 weeksNoNoNo
        Rao S (2003)404851.2 (0.6 to 2.3)High vs low activity28 weeksNoNoNo
        Stinson JC (2003)493591.79 (0.93 to 3.44)Fatigue score >660 (severe vs ⩽660) high vs low22–26 weeksNoNoNo
        Tuntiseranee P (1998)523461.2 (0.4 to 3.8)High vs low15–28 weeksNoNoNo
    Case–control studies
        Hartikainen-Sorri AL (1989)153580.81 (0.46 to 1.43)Heavy physical loading (yes vs no)Not statedNoYesNo
        Luke B* (1995)2414701.4 (1.1 to 1.9)Occupational fatigue score (⩾3 vs <3)Not statedYesNoYes
    Cross-sectional studies
        Ceron-Mireles P (1996)1124291.25 (0.97 to 1.6)Job requires physical effort (yes vs no)Not statedNoNoNo
        Fortier I (1995)1318290.87 (0.49 to 1.54)Important vs noneNot statedNoNoNo
        Homer CJ (1990)187732.0 (1.1 to 3.9)High vs low exertion jobNot statedNoNoNo
        Mamelle N (1984)2719281.7 (1.1 to 2.0)High vs low exertionNot statedNoYesNo
        McDonald AD (1988)29227611.1, p>0.05Great physical effort (yes vs no)Not statedNoNoNo
        Nurminen T (1989)356751.4 (1.1 to 1.7)Work with a moderate physical load vs sedentaryTrimester 3NoNoNo
        Peoples-Sheps MD (1991)365351.1 (0.6 to 2.1)High vs low strength requirementNot statedNoNoNo
        Ramirez G* (1990)3919601.75 (1.12 to 2.75)Very heavy vs low physical demandsNot statedNoNoYes
        Saurel-Cubizolles MJ (1985)425804.11 (2.15 to 7.78)Activity score (2/3 vs 0/1 strenuous items)Not statedNoYesNo
        Saurel-Cubizolles MJ (1987)4322622.13 (1.16 to 3.76)Activity score (3/4 items vs none)Trimester 1NoYesNo
        Saurel-Cubizolles MJ (1991)448741.2 (0.5 to 2.5)Activity score (2/3 vs 0/1 items)Not statedNoNoNo