Maternal and Child Health Journal

, Volume 15, Issue 7, pp 1097–1109 | Cite as

Maternal Marital Status and Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

  • Prakesh S. ShahEmail author
  • Jamie Zao
  • Samana Ali


Systematically review risks of an infant being born with low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB) or small for gestational age (SGA) among married and unmarried women. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and bibliographies of identified articles were searched for English language studies. Studies reporting birth outcomes of married and unmarried (single and cohabitant) were included. Two reviewers independently collected data and assessed the quality of the studies for biases in sample selection, exposure assessment, confounder, analytical, outcome assessments, and attrition. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect model for both unadjusted and adjusted data and odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Twenty-one studies of low to moderate risk of bias were included. Compared to married mothers unadjusted odds of (a) LBW was increased among unmarried (OR 1.46, 95%CI 1.25–1.71), single (OR 1.65, 95%CI 1.44–1.88) and cohabitating (OR 1.29, 95%CI 1.25–1.32) mothers; (b) PTB was increased among unmarried (OR 1.22, 95%CI 1.14–1.31), single (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.39–1.72) and cohabitating (OR 1.15, 95%CI 1.08–1.23) mothers and (c) SGA birth was increased among unmarried (OR 1.45, 95%CI 1.32–1.61), single (OR 1.70, 95%CI 1.47–1.97) and cohabitating (OR 1.36, 95%CI 1.30–1.42) mothers. Meta-analyses of adjusted odds estimates confirmed these findings at marginally lower odds. Maternal unmarried status is associated with an increased risk of LBW, PTB and SGA births.


Birth outcomes Infant-low birth weight Infant-premature Married Cohabitant Single 



Low birth weight


Preterm birth


Small for gestational age


Unadjusted odds ratio


Adjusted odds ratio



We would sincerely like to thank Elizabeth Uleryk, Chief Librarian at the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada for her contribution in developing search strategy and running searches on a periodic basis. This study was supported by funding from Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) Knowledge Synthesis/Translation grant # KRS 86242. CIHR has no role in analyses, writing of the report, interpretation of data or decision to submit the manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Blondel, B., & Zuber, M. C. (1988). Marital status and cohabitation during pregnancy: Relationship with social conditions, antenatal care and pregnancy outcome in France. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 2(2), 125–137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ventural, S. J. (2009). Changing patterns of nonmarital childbearing in the United States. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; Report No.: NCHS Data Brief, no. 18.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jose, A., O’Leary, D., & Moyer, A. (2010). Does premarital cohabitation predict subsequent marital stability and marital quality? The Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bird, S. T., Chandra, A., Bennett, T., & Harvey, S. M. (2000). Beyond marital status: Relationship type and duration and the risk of low birth weight. Family Planning Perspectives, 32(6), 281–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doucet, H., Baumgarten, M., & Infante-Rivard, C. (1989). Low birth weight and household structure. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 10(5), 249–252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hanke, W., Kalinka, J., & Sobala, W. (1998). Single motherhood, urban residence and SGA babies in Central Poland. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 61(3), 289–291.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kirchengast, S., Mayer, M., & Voigt, M. (2007). Pregnancy outcome is associated with maternal marital status in Austria–even at the beginning of the 21st century. Anthropologischer Anzeiger, 65(4), 415–426.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luo, Z. C., Wilkins, R., & Kramer, M. S. (2004). Disparities in pregnancy outcomes according to marital and cohabitation status. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 103(6), 1300–1307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    MacDonald, L. D., Peacock, J. L., & Anderson, H. R. (1992). Marital status: association with social and economic circumstances, psychological state and outcomes of pregnancy. Journal of Public Health Medicine, 14(1), 26–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vagero, D., Koupilova, I., Leon, D. A., & Lithell, U. B. (1999). Social determinants of birthweight, ponderal index and gestational age in Sweden in the 1920s and the 1980s. Acta Paediatrica, 88(4), 445–453.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Raatikainen, K., Heiskanen, N., & Heinonen, S. (2005). Marriage still protects pregnancy. BJOG : An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 112(10), 1411–1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sung, J. F., McGrady, G. A., Rowley, D. L., Hogue, C. J., Alema-Mensah, E., & Lypson, M. L. (1993). Interactive effect of race and marital status in low birthweight. Ethnicity and Disease, 3(2), 129–136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bennett, T. (1992). Marital status and infant health outcomes. Social Science and Medicine, 35(9), 1179–1187.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stroup, D. F., Berlin, J. A., Morton, S. C., Olkin, I., Williamson, G. D., Rennie, D., et al. (2000). Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(15), 2008–2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Higgins, P. T., Green, S. (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration 2008 [cited 2008 Mar 1]; (Version 5.0.0)Available from: url:
  16. 16.
    Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ahmed, F. (1990). Unmarried mothers as a high-risk group for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Journal of Community Health, 15(1), 35–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Albrecht, S. L., Miller, M. K., & Clarke, L. L. (1994). Assessing the importance of family structure in understanding birth outcomes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 987–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Amini, S. B., Catalano, P. M., & Mann, L. I. (1996). Births to unmarried mothers: trends and obstetric outcomes. Womens Health Issues, 2006, 264–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Auger, N., Daniel, M., Platt, R. W., Luo, Z. C., Wu, Y., & Choiniere, R. (2008). The joint influence of marital status, interpregnancy interval, and neighborhood on small for gestational age birth: A retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 8, 7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gale, R., Zengen, S., Harlap, S., Fischer, A. F., & Stevenson, D. K. (1988). Birth out of wedlock and the risk of intrauterine growth retardation. American Journal of Perinatology, 5(3), 278–282.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Golding, J., Henriques, J., & Thomas, P. (1986). Unmarried at delivery. II. Perinatal morbidity and mortality. Early Human Development, 14(3–4), 217–227.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Manderbacka, K., Merilainen, J., Hemminki, E., Rahkonen, O., & Teperi, J. (1992). Marital status as a predictor of perinatal outcome in finland. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 508–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    McIntosh, L. J., Roumayah, N. E., & Bottoms, S. F. (1995). Perinatal outcome of broken marriage in the inner city. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 85(2), 233–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rantakallio, P., & Oja, H. (1990). Perinatal risk for infants of unmarried mothers over a period of 20 years. Early Human Development, 22(3), 157–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zeitlin, J. A., Saurel-Cubizolles, M. J., & Ancel, P. Y. (2002). Marital status, cohabitation, and risk of preterm birth in Europe: Where births outside marriage are common and uncommon. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 16(2), 124–130.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hein, H. A., Burmeister, L. F., & Papke, K. R. (1990). The relationship of unwed status to infant mortality. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 76(5 Pt 1), 763–768.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kalinka, J., Laudanski, T., Hanke, W., & Wasiela, M. (2003). Do microbiological factors account for poor pregnancy outcome among unmarried pregnant women in Poland? Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy, 18(5), 345–352.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kiernan, K. (1999). Childbearing outside marriage in western Europe. Population Trends, Autumn(98), 11–20.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Maher, J., Macfarlane, A. (2004). Trends in live births and birthweight by social class, marital status and mother’s age, 1976–2000. Health Statistics Quarterly, Winter(23), 34–42.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wu, L. L., & Martinson, B. C. (1993). Family structure and risk of premarital birth. American Sociological Review, 58, 210–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dickute, J., Padaiga, Z., Grabauskas, V., Nadisauskiene, R. J., Basys, V., & Gaizauskiene, A. (2004). Maternal socio-economic factors and the risk of low birth weight in Lithuania. Medicina (Kaunas), 40(5), 475–482.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Koupilova, I., Vagero, D., Leon, D. A., Pikhart, H., Prikazsky, V., Holcik, J., et al. (1998). Social variation in size at birth and preterm delivery in the Czech Republic and Sweden, 1989–91. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 12(1), 7–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lekea-Karanika, V., Tzoumaka-Bakoula, C., & Matsaniotis, N. S. (1999). Sociodemographic determinants of low birthweight in Greece: A population study. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 13(1), 65–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pascoe, J. M., Chessare, J., Baugh, E., Urich, L., & Ialongo, N. (1987). Help with prenatal household tasks and newborn birth weight: Is there an association? Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 8(4), 207–212.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Peacock, J. L., Bland, J. M., & Anderson, H. R. (1995). Preterm delivery: Effects of socioeconomic factors, psychological stress, smoking, alcohol, and caffeine. British Medical Journal, 311(7004), 531–535.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vatten, L. J., & Skjaerven, R. (2003). Effects on pregnancy outcome of changing partner between first two births: Prospective population study. British Medical Journal, 327(7424), 1138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ramsey, C. N., Jr, Abell, T. D., & Baker, L. C. (1986). The relationship between family functioning, life events, family structure, and the outcome of pregnancy. Journal of Family Practice, 22(6), 521–527.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Peters, J., & Mengersen, K. (2008). Selective reporting of adjusted estimates in observational epidemiology studies: Reasons and implications for meta-analyses. Evaluation and the health professions, 31(4), 370–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PaediatricsMount Sinai HospitalTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of PaediatricsUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of Health Policy, Management and EvaluationUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations