Background: Clinical presentation and outcomes of COVID-19 infection during pregnancy remain limited and fragmented. Objectives: To summarize the existing literature on COVID-19 infection during pregnancy and childbirth, particularly concerning clinical presentation and outcomes. Search strategy: A systematic search of LitCovid, EBSCO MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases. The references of relevant studies were also searched.Selection criteria: Identified titles and abstracts were screened to select original reports and cross-checked for overlap of cases. Data collection and analysis:A descriptive summary organized by aspects of clinical presentations (symptoms, imaging, and laboratory) and outcomes (maternal and perinatal). Main results:We identified 33 studies reporting 385 pregnant women with COVID-19 infection: 368 (95.6%) mild; 14 (3.6%) severe; and 3 (0.8%) critical. Seventeen women were admitted to intensive care, including six who were mechanically ventilated and one maternal mortality. A total of 252 women gave birth, comprising 175 (69.4%) cesarean and 77 (30.6%) vaginal births. Outcomes for 256 newborns included four RT-PCR positive neonates, two stillbirths, and one neonatal death.

Background HPV tests for the screening of cervical cancer in low‐income countries (LICs) might improve early detection and preventive efforts. Objectives To determine the diagnostic accuracy of HPV tests for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) in LICs. Search strategy The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and CINAHL databases were searched on June 1, 2020. References of relevant studies were hand‐searched. Selection criteria Diagnostic test accuracy studies were included if women had an HPV test for cervical cancer screening, followed by verification with colposcopy and colposcopy‐directed biopsy. The primary target was CIN2+. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Bivariate diagnostic random‐effects meta‐analysis was used. Main results Eleven studies including 82 556 women were eligible, most of which were at low risk of bias. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio of hybrid capture test of samples collected from the cervix by healthcare providers for detecting CIN2+ and CIN3+ was 42.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.7–76.3) and 97.1 (95% CI 35.3–215.0), respectively. Conclusions Evidence indicates that hybrid capture tests can be used for screening of cervical cancer in LICs. Future studies are warranted for self‐sampling and for low‐cost HPV tests.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) accounts for around 30% of all trauma-related deaths. Over the past 40 years, TBI has remained a major cause of mortality after trauma. The primary injury caused by the injurious mechanical force leads to irreversible damage to brain tissue. The potentially preventable secondary injury can be accentuated by addressing systemic insults. Early recognition and prompt intervention are integral to achieve better outcomes. Consequently, surgeons still need to be aware of the basic yet integral emergency management strategies for severe TBI (sTBI). In this narrative review, we outlined some of the controversies in the early care of sTBI that have not been settled by the publication of the Brain Trauma Foundation’s 4th edition guidelines in 2017. The topics covered included the following: mode of prehospital transport, maintaining airway patency while securing the cervical spine, achieving adequate ventilation, and optimizing circulatory physiology. We discuss fluid resuscitation and blood product transfusion as components of improving circulatory mechanics and oxygen delivery to injured brain tissue. An outline of evidence-based antiplatelet and anticoagulant reversal strategies is discussed in the review. In addition, the current evidence as well as the evidence gaps for using tranexamic acid in sTBI are briefly reviewed. A brief note on the controversial emergency surgical interventions for sTBI is included. Clinicians should be aware of the latest evidence for sTBI. Periods between different editions of guidelines can have an abundance of new literature that can influence patient care. The recent advances included in this review should be considered both for formulating future guidelines for the management of sTBI and for designing future clinical studies in domains with clinical equipoise.

STUDY QUESTION What is the scope of literature regarding women’s reproductive span in terms of definitions, trends, determinants? SUMMARY ANSWER The scoping review showed a wide variation in definitions, trends, and determinants of biological, social and effective women’s reproductive span. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Women’s reproductive span refers to a woman’s childbearing years. This influences women’s reproductive decisions. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A systematic scoping review was conducted. We searched MEDLINE, Pubmed, JSTOR, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus electronic databases from inception to January 2021 without imposing language or date restrictions. We searched unpublished sources including the Global Burden of Disease, Demographic and Health Surveys, and National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. The list of relevant references was searched by hand. Sixty- seven reports on woman’s reproductive span were included in this review. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS This scoping systematic review followed a previously published framework and guidelines. The reporting of this scoping review followed the reporting guidance provided in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Extension for Scoping Reviews. Identified records were independently screened and data were extracted. We performed conceptual synthesis by grouping the studies by available concepts of reproductive span and then summarized definitions, measures used, temporal trends, determinants, and broad findings of implications on demographics and assisted reproduction. Structured tabulation and graphical synthesis were used to show patterns in the data and convey detailed information efficiently, along with narrative commentary MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The relevant 67 reports on woman’s reproductive span were published between 1980 and 2020 from 74 countries. Most reports (42/67) were cross-sectional in design. Literature on reproductive span was conceptually grouped as biological (the interval between age at menarche and age at menopause), effective (when a woman is both fertile and engaging in sexual activity), and social (period of exposure to sexual activity). We summarized the working definitions, trends, and determinants of each concept. Few articles addressed implications on demographics and assisted reproduction. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION A formal assessment of methodological quality of the included studies was not performed because the aim of this review was to provide an overview of the existing evidence base regardless of quality. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The review produced a comprehensive list of possible definitions of women’s reproductive spans. This list can be used in a subsequent Delphi exercise aiming to ask a broad spectrum of relevant stakeholders to rate the importance of each definition in relation to demography and fertility care. This data will then help inform a consensus meeting in which a selected group of editors will collaborate to outline a set of core definitions, identify implications for policy, practice or research, and define future research opportunities to explore linkages between reproductive spans and need for assisted reproduction STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work received funding from the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), a cosponsored programme executed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The authors had no competing interests. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A

Background: With the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new severe life-threatening inflammatory syndrome has been reported in some pediatric populations. Global attention was shifted towards the syndrome termed multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), with new case reports flooding in. Objectives: The aim of this scoping review is to summarize the existing reports on MIS-C and focus on the demographics, diagnosis, clinical presentation, laboratory investigations, imaging studies, treatment, and patient outcomes. Methods: We conducted a systemic search using LitCovid and MEDLINE electronic databases. We screened citations, titles and abstracts, then reviewed potentially relevant articles in full. After data extraction, we reported our final data under subheadings of demographics, diagnosis, clinical presentation, laboratory investigations, imaging studies, treatment, and patient outcomes. Results: Our search strategy yielded 42 original studies reporting 674 pediatric patients fitting the case definition of MIS-C. The studies included 21 case reports, 16 case series and 5 cohort studies. The most common reported symptom of MIS-C was fever (98%). Gastrointestinal symptoms were common (N=557, 83%). Interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were measured in 125 patients and was elevated in 94 % (N=117). Echocardiography detected coronary artery lesions in 100 patients. Prophylactic and/or therapeutic heparin was required in 34% (N=227) of patients. The most commonly administered treatment modality targeting MIS-C was intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (N=490). Corticosteroids (N=347) and aspirin (N=112) were also integral parts of the treatment regimens. Biologic therapy was integrated into the treatment regimen for 116 patients. Intensive care unit (ICU) admission was alarming (N=478, 71%). 9 fatalities were recorded due to MIS-C Conclusions: We believe MIS-C bears pathophysiological resemblance to the well-known Kawasaki disease but with some key differences highlighted. Understanding those differences will aid our management plan for such patients.