Quiz Ref ID Excessive and insufficient gestational weight gain have been associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including small for gestational age (SGA), large for gestational age (LGA), macrosomia, cesarean delivery, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), preeclampsia, postpartum weight retention, and offspring obesity.^1-4 The Institute of Medicine (IOM; now known as the National Academy of Medicine) recommendations regarding gestational weight gain were developed in 1990 to guide clinical practice.⁵ These aimed to reduce the incidence of low-birth-weight babies and were based on a 1980 National Natality Survey of a largely white population. The updated IOM guidelines in 2009⁶ incorporated World Health Organization (WHO) categories of maternal body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; BMI for underweight, <18.5; normal weight, 18.5-24.9; overweight, 25-29.9; and obese, ≥30)⁷ and recommended less gestational weight gain for obese women (Table 1). The 2009 guidelines identified maternal and infant relationships with gestational weight gain but were based on lower general population BMI with limited ethnic diversity. The 2009 IOM guidelines are endorsed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, although they are not universally implemented.⁸

What is the recommended assessment and management of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? International evidence-based guidelines including 166 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of women with PCOS. Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. Diagnosis of PCOS remains controversial and assessment and management are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist. International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength. Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, five guideline development groups, and consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed guideline scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included pediatrics, endocrinology, gynecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, and translation experts. Thirty-seven societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 60 prioritized clinical questions involving 40 systematic and 20 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus voting within the five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, with final recommendations approved across all panels. The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS is generally of low to moderate quality. The guideline provides 31 evidence based recommendations, 59 clinical consensus recommendations and 76 clinical practice points all related to assessment and management of PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include: i) considerable refinement of individual diagnostic criteria with a focus on improving accuracy of diagnosis; ii) reducing unnecessary testing; iii) increasing focus on education, lifestyle modification, emotional wellbeing and quality of life; and iv) emphasizing evidence based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. Overall evidence is generally low to moderate quality, requiring significantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition, especially around refining specific diagnostic features in PCOS. Regional health system variation is acknowledged and a process for guideline and translation resource adaptation is provided. The international guideline for the assessment and management of PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program. The guideline was primarily funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) supported by a partnership with ESHRE and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guideline development group members did not receive payment. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of conflicts of interest were declared at the outset and updated throughout the guideline process, aligned with NHMRC guideline processes. Full details of conflicts declared across the guideline development groups are available at https://www.monash.edu/medicine/sphpm/mchri/pcos/guideline in the Register of disclosures of interest. Of named authors, Dr Costello has declared shares in Virtus Health and past sponsorship from Merck Serono for conference presentations. Prof. Laven declared grants from Ferring, Euroscreen and personal fees from Ferring, Euroscreen, Danone and Titus Healthcare. Prof. Norman has declared a minor shareholder interest in an IVF unit. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our partner and collaborating societies and consumer organizations, was independently assessed against AGREEII criteria and underwent methodological review. This guideline was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and was submitted for final approval by the NHMRC.

Globally, the number of refugees and asylum seekers has reached record highs. Past research in refugee mental health has reported wide variation in mental illness prevalence data, partially attributable to methodological limitations. This systematic review aims to summarise the current body of evidence for the prevalence of mental illness in global refugee populations and overcome methodological limitations of individual studies. A comprehensive search of electronic databases was undertaken from 1 January 2003 to 4 February 2020 (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EBM Reviews, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PILOTS, Web of Science). Quantitative studies were included if diagnosis of mental illness involved a clinical interview and use of a validated assessment measure and reported at least 50 participants. Study quality was assessed using a descriptive approach based on a template according to study design (modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). Random-effects models, based on inverse variance weights, were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for sex, sample size, displacement duration, visa status, country of origin, current residence, type of interview (interpreter-assisted or native language), and diagnostic measure. The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD) 42016046349. The search yielded a result of 21,842 records. Twenty-six studies, which included one randomised controlled trial and 25 observational studies, provided results for 5,143 adult refugees and asylum seekers. Studies were undertaken across 15 countries: Australia (652 refugees), Austria (150), China (65), Germany (1,104), Italy (297), Lebanon (646), Nepal (574), Norway (64), South Korea (200), Sweden (86), Switzerland (164), Turkey (238), Uganda (77), United Kingdom (420), and the United States of America (406). The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was 31.46% (95% CI 24.43–38.5), the prevalence of depression was 31.5% (95% CI 22.64–40.38), the prevalence of anxiety disorders was 11% (95% CI 6.75–15.43), and the prevalence of psychosis was 1.51% (95% CI 0.63–2.40). A limitation of the study is that substantial heterogeneity was present in the prevalence estimates of PTSD, depression, and anxiety, and limited covariates were reported in the included studies. This comprehensive review generates current prevalence estimates for not only PTSD but also depression, anxiety, and psychosis. Refugees and asylum seekers have high and persistent rates of PTSD and depression, and the results of this review highlight the need for ongoing, long-term mental health care beyond the initial period of resettlement.

The association between Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines and pregnancy outcomes across ethnicities is uncertain. We evaluated the associations of gestational weight gain (GWG) outside 2009 IOM guidelines, with maternal and infant outcomes across the USA, western Europe and east Asia, with subgroup analyses in Asia. The aim was to explore ethnic differences in maternal prepregnancy body mass index (BMI), GWG and health outcomes across these regions. Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of observational studies were used for the study. MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Embase and all Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews were searched from 1999 to 2017. Studies were stratified by prepregnancy BMI category and total pregnancy GWG. Odds ratio (ORs) 95% confidence intervals (CI) applied recommended GWG within each BMI category as the reference. Primary outcomes were small for gestational age (SGA), preterm birth and large for gestational age (LGA). Secondary outcomes were macrosomia, caesarean section and gestational diabetes. Overall, 5874 studies were identified and 23 were included (n = 1,309,136). Prepregnancy overweight/obesity in the USA, Europe and Asia was measured at 42%, 30% and 10% respectively, with underweight 5%, 3% and 17%. GWG below guidelines in the USA, Europe and Asia was 21%, 18% and 31%, and above was 51%, 51% and 37% respectively. Applying regional BMI categories in Asia showed GWG above guidelines (51%) was similar to that in the USA and Europe. GWG below guidelines was associated with a higher risk of SGA (USA/Europe [OR 1.51; CI 1.39, 1.63]; Asia [1.63; 1.45, 1.82]) and preterm birth (USA/Europe [1.35; 1.17, 1.56]; Asia [1.06; 0.78, 1.44]) than GWG within guidelines. GWG above guidelines was associated with a higher risk of LGA (USA/Europe [1.93; 1.81, 2.06]; Asia [1.68; 1.51 , 1.87]), macrosomia (USA/Europe [1.87; 1.70, 2.06]; Asia [2.18; 1.91, 2.49]) and caesarean (USA/Europe [1.26; 1.21, 1.33]; Asia [1.37; 1.30, 1.45]). Risks remained elevated when regional BMI categories were applied for GWG recommendations. More women in Asia were categorised as having GWG below guidelines using World Health Organization (WHO) (60%) compared to regional BMI categories (16%), yet WHO BMI was not accompanied by increased risks of adverse outcomes. Women in the USA and western Europe have higher prepregnancy BMI and higher rates of GWG above guidelines than women in east Asia. However, when using regional BMI categories in east Asia, rates of GWG above guidelines are similar across the three continents. GWG outside guidelines is associated with adverse outcomes across all regions. If regional BMI categories are used in east Asia, IOM guidelines are applicable in the USA, western Europe and east Asia.

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects 6%-21% of women. PCOS is the primary cause of anovulatory infertility, with major health and economic costs, yet we are unaware of any community-based, natural history studies on fertility and fertility treatments published to date. We aim to compare infertility, fertility treatment use, and relationship to body mass index (BMI) in women reporting PCOS to women not reporting PCOS in a community-based population. This is a cross-sectional analysis of a longitudinal cohort study, the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH). For the ALSWH, women from the general community were randomly selected from the national public insurance database. Mailed survey data were collected at multiple time points. At survey 4, there were 9145 respondents aged 28-33 years. Of 8612 women with known PCOS status, 478 women reported having PCOS. Information regarding fertility status was available for 4856 women. This was the subgroup used in this analysis. The main outcomes measures are self-reported PCOS status, BMI, infertility, and use of fertility therapies including ovulation induction and in vitro fertilization (IVF). Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with infertility and use of fertility treatment. Self-reported PCOS prevalence was 5.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.3%-6.4%). Infertility was noted by 72% of 309 women reporting PCOS, compared with 16% of 4547 women not reporting PCOS (p<0.001). Infertility was 15-fold higher in women reporting PCOS (adjusted odds ratio 14.9, 95% CI 10.9-20.3), independent of BMI. Of women reporting infertility, there was greater use of fertility hormone treatment, (62%, n=116 vs. 33%, n=162, p<0.001) in women reporting PCOS; however, IVF use was similar. In this community-based cohort of women, infertility and use of fertility hormone treatment was significantly higher in women reporting PCOS. Considering the prevalence of PCOS and the health and economic burden of infertility, strategies to optimize fertility are important.