Breast Health

COVID-19

Cervical Health 

Contraception

Curbside Consults

Dermatology

Drug Pipeline News

Endometriosis

Genetic Testing

Gynecologic Oncology

Gynecology

Fetal Imaging

Abnormal Obstetrical Ultrasound

Ultrasound

Women's Imaging

Breast Imaging

Women's Ultrasound

Imaging

Infertility

LARC

Legally Speaking

Life Transitions

Malpractice

Menopause

Mental Health

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

Obstetrics

Opinion

Osteoporosis

Pediatrics

Practice Management

Pregnancy and Birth

Sexual Health

Sexually Transmitted Infections

Surgery

Technology

Urology

Uterine Fibroids

Vulvovaginal Disease

Well Woman

About

News

Media

Podcasts

Insights

Investigator Perspectives

Medical World News

Peer Exchange

Peers & Perspectives

Videos

Conferences

Conference Coverage

Conference Listing

Publications

Contemporary OB/GYN® Journal

Digital Supplements

CME/CE

Resources

Physician Fact Sheets

Interactive Tools

Supplements and Featured Publications

Subscribe

Partnerships

Jill Liss, MD, MSCP, FACOG, is associate clinical professor, OB/GYN, at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.

She joined the MJH Life Sciences team in December 2019. She graduated from Youngstown State University in 2019 with a bachelor's degree in journalism and a minor in political science. Prior to graduating, Morgan worked as the editor-in-chief of her college newspaper. She went on to work as an assignment editor at a broadcast news station in Youngstown, Ohio, before joining 

 You can reach her at mebert@mjhlifesciences.com.

Jill Liss, MD, shares details on her presentation on the physiology of menopause care and how clinicians can use evidence to improve patient care at the 2025 ACOG ACSM. 

Tailoring menopause care to your patients' goals, with Jill Liss, MD

Elizabeth Mollard, PhD, WHNP, CNM, is an assistant professor at the UNMC College of Nursing.

Elizabeth Mollard, PhD, WHNP, CNM, shares her research, presented at the 2025 ACOG ACSM, on Medicaid postpartum depression (PPD) screening and coverage policies on PPD diagnosis.

Elizabeth Mollard, PhD, details how state-level screening and coverage impact maternal mental health

Victoria Wang, MD, is a gynecology oncology fellow at Brigham & Women's Hospital.

Victoria Wang, MD, discusses updated ASCCP recommendations for post-treatment monitoring of high-grade dysplasia and the importance of identifying high-risk patients early.

Victoria Wang, MD, discusses surveillance for high-grade dysplasia

Farah Hassan Amro, MD, is chief of clinical practice at ACOG and an assistant professor in the department of OB/GYN and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas, Health Science Center at Houston.

Farah Amro, MD, shares her research at the 2025 ACOG ACSM on leaving the placenta in situ in select patients with placenta accreta spectrum.


Farah Amro, MD, discusses leaving the placenta in situ for patients with placenta accreta spectrum 

Advertise

Contact Us

Job Board

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Contemporary OB/GYN

Facebook

LinkedIn

RSS Feed

Spotlight

A Psychedelic to Treat Postpartum Depression?

CMV: In the Know

RSV Roundtable

STIs

Supplement: Closing the Gap in Cervical Cancer Screening

Vaginismus: Managing a Misunderstood and Underdiagnosed Condition

Why vNOTES Make Sense for My Patients

1rem

Authors

Saying "obstetrician-gynecologist" is a mouthful for most people, and it's probably the most abbreviated specialty in medicine, both spoken and written. However, there doesn't seem to be a consensus on how to pronounce OB-GYN. First, is it the two-syllable "O-B" or the monosyllabic "Ob"? Second, is it "gin" or "gyne" (like "Lyme")? I wonder if you have a preference. I know I do.

Almost nobody says "obstetrician-gynecologist" when speaking about these specialist physicians. But what's the "correct" way to pronounce OB/GYN?

Is It Ob-Gin or Ob-Gyne?

What's your diagnosis in this late second trimester fetus?

Challenge your diagnostic skills. What's your diagnosis based on these abdominal images of a late second trimester fetus?

Clinical

Image IQ: The Fetal Bowel

There is a link between taking longer to eat an initial meal after waking up and increased caloric intake later in the day in pregnant women, along with taking longer to sleep after the last meal, according to a recent study published in 

Increasing research has been performed about the link between the timing of food intake and metabolic health, with investigators noting that eating and sleep behaviors should not occur at the same time of the day. This makes the time between awakening and the first meal as an important health factor, with increased health risks reported form skipping this meal.

“It is inferred that the timing of maternal food intake has the potential to influence maternal and fetal circadian rhythms, fetal development during pregnancy, and the subsequent metabolic health of the offspring, though this is still not fully understood,” wrote investigators.

Data has also indicated a link between sleep quality and weight gain distribution during pregnancy. Therefore, investigators conducted the longitudinal study to determine the impact of sleep-eating intervals on eating and sleeping times and food consumption among pregnant women.

Adult patients at the Integrated Care Units of Uberlândia and the Prenatal Service of the Teaching Hospital of Universidade Federal de Uberlândia who agreed to participate were included in the analysis. Exclusion criteria included prior chronic noncommunicable disease, not providing required information, and using illicit substances.

Data was obtained in all 3 trimesters. Initial sociodemographic data, medical history, physical activity, and gestational data were obtained through a questionnaire following the retrieval of consent. Three 24-hour dietary recalls were completed each trimester to assess food intake and meal timing.

Dietary recalls included details about consumed foods and beverages, with common household measures used to determine portion sizes. Anthropometric variables such as pre-pregnancy weight, current weight, and height were also measured.

Participants also reported their habitual sleeping pattern and aske times in a version of the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire. The mean sleep time on free days was used to determine the chronotype. The time between waking and initial eating was calculated to evaluate sleep-eating interactions.

Associations between wake-eating time and sleep behavior

Waking up earlier on work and free days and going to sleep later on free days was reported in pregnant women with a longer waking time to first eating episode vs those with a shorter waking time to first eating episode. A reduced chronotype value was also reported in these individuals.

Six percent, 6%, and 7% of pregnant woman skipped breakfast in the first, second, and third trimesters, respectively. Waking time to first eating episode was negatively correlated with waking time on workdays, with values of β = -0.509, β = -0.503, and β = -0.423 during the first, second, and third trimester, respectively.

For sleep duration on workdays, these values were β = -0.427, β = -0.483, and β = -0.445, respectively, also highlighting a negative association. Finally, a value of β= -0.344 was reported for sleep duration on free days in the first trimester and β= -0.235 for chronotype in the third trimester.

Bedtime and last meal timing correlations

Additional associations included the last eating episode to bedtime interval with sleep duration on workdays, with values of β = -0.391, β = -0.293, and β = -0.288 during the first, second, and third trimesters of pregnancy, respectively, Additionally, a link with sleep duration was noted in the second trimester.

On workdays, positive associations were reported between the last eating episode to bedtime interval and bedtime, at β = 0.394 in the first trimester, β = 0.542 in the second, and β = 0.551in the third. Similar associations were reported on free days.

The waking time to first eating episode interval was also linked to the percentage of calories eaten at dinner in the first and second trimesters, with values of β = 0.266 and β = 0.269, respectively. Links for the percentage of calories in the first meal were reported in the first and third trimesters, at β = 0.404 and β = 0.432, respectively.

Finally, a positive association was reported between the timing of the first meal in the first trimester and the last eating episode to bedtime interval. This showed significant associations in early and mid-pregnancy between delaying the first meal after waking up with both higher calorie intake and shorter sleep duration.

“Additional studies are needed for a more comprehensive understanding of this subject,” wrote investigators.

Pereira CS, Balieiro LCT, Teixeira GP, et al. Association between eating-fasting and sleep-wake cycles with eating times and food consumption throughout the day: Longitudinal study with pregnant women. 

 2024;18(1):e44-e55. doi:10.1055/s-0044-1787276

Ma X, Chen Q, Pu Y. Skipping breakfast is associated with overweight and obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 

. 2020;14(1):1-8. doi:10.1016/j.orcp.2019.12.002

A new study found that prolonged time between waking and eating in pregnancy is associated with increased calorie consumption and disrupted sleep patterns.

Length of time to meal after waking linked to caloric intake in pregnant women

The Stanford Obstetric Recovery Checklist (STORK) is effective for measuring outpatient postpartum recovery, according to a recent study published in 

Screening in large populations is often performed through patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), making them the standard method for measuring recovery after childbirth. However, experts have noted difficulties in measuring postpartum recovery because of its unique and complex characteristics.

“A PROM designed and validated for use at the 6-week obstetric outpatient follow-up clinic visit could be useful for clinicians to facilitate discussion and counseling,” wrote investigators.

The Delphi method may be used to reach consensus among experts about a certain topic, leading to the development of new condition-specific PROMs. Therefore, investigators conducted a study to create a global outpatient postpartum recovery PROM using Delphi consensus across multidisciplinary stakeholders and patient representatives.

The STORK was developed across 3 phases, the first being identification of existing questions relevant to postpartum recovery. This was accomplished through a systematic review, in which items were selected from a list of 16 PROMs.

Afterward, STORK items were chosen using the Delphi method between January 11 and April 12, 2021. Sixteen stakeholders were included on the panel, from fields including obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine, postpartum recovery, pain, epidemiology, psychiatry, sleep, nursing and midwifery, and PROM development.

Finally, feedback on STORK items was obtained through cognitive debriefing interviews with 10 postpartum patients. The STORK was then tested in English-speaking women aged over 18 years, with all modes of delivery and anesthesia modes included. Recruitment occurred 12 to 36 hours after delivery.

Postpartum recovery quality was assessed at baseline, as well as weeks 2, 6, and 12 postpartum. Demographic, medical, obstetric, and anesthetic data were collected at baseline, while PROMs were completed at each follow-up time point using REDCap software (Research Electronic Data Capture, version 14.1.4; Vanderbilt University).

PROMs completed included the 47-item STORK PROM using a 5-point Likert scale and the validated EuroQoL Five-Dimensions Three-Levels (EQ-5D-3L). Psychometric STORK properties at 6 weeks postpartum were reported as the primary outcome. This outcome was assessed through validity, reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility.

There were 500 items in the first round of the Delphi process, 165 in the second, and 47 in the third. Participants were aged a mean 33.3 years, with 1% being American Indian, 14% Asian, 7% Black, 14% Hispanic, 0.4% Pacific Islander, 63% White, and 3% other races and ethnicities. Sixty-two percent of patients responded after 6 weeks.

Structural validity and score correlations

Structural validity was reported for STORK when defining dimensions with a 4-factor model including dimensionality, model fit, item and scale properties, and differential item functioning for key groups. Differences in performance at baseline vs week 6 were found for interest in sexual activity and aches and pains-related items.

A correlation between STORK scores and EQ-5D-3L scores of ρ = −0.67 was reported. Additionally, STORK successfully differentiated between patients with good vs poor recovery, with a median STORK score of 151 indicating good recover and 129 indicating poor recovery.

Consistency was also found for individuals in the lowest and highest postpartum recovery percentiles. Additionally, reliability was found for STORK, with a Cronbach of α = 0.92, interitem correlation of r = 0.20, and split-half reliability of ρ = 0.98.

STORK scores increased across 12 weeks, indicating responsiveness. Increases between baseline and week 12 were 19% after spontaneous vaginal delivery, 31% after operative vaginal delivery, 27% after scheduled cesarean delivery, and 20% after nonscheduled cesarean delivery.

These results indicated STORK as a valid, reliable, and responsive PROM for measuring global postpartum recovery. The clinical utility of this tool may be determined through future research.

“Future studies are needed to evaluate the clinical utility of STORK by comparing it with standard care for evaluation of outpatient postpartum recovery and to evaluate its performance in different patient groups, languages, and health care settings,” wrote investigators.

Sultan P, Pandal P, Murthy A, et al. Development and validation of the Stanford Obstetric Recovery Checklist (STORK): A Delphi consensus and multicenter clinical validation study. 

. 2025;8(4):e255713. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.5713

Ciechanowicz S﻿, Setty T﻿, Robson E﻿, et al. Development and evaluation of an obstetric quality-of-recovery score (ObsQoR-11) after elective caesarean delivery.﻿ 

. 2019;122(1):69-78. doi:10.1016/j.bja.2018.06.011

A new study shows the Stanford Obstetric Recovery Checklist is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing outpatient postpartum recovery at multiple stages.

STORK proven effective for measuring postpartum recovery

As we turn the page to a new era, it is with both pride and gratitude that we present the final print edition of 

. Since its inception in 1972, for over 50 years, this journal has been a steadfast resource for busy practitioners, offering clear, evidence-based articles that have supported daily clinical decision-making. What began as a vision by John Queenan, MD, has evolved into a foundational tool for health care professionals, shaping how we approach patient care, educate our peers, and advocate for women’s health.

One of the journal’s key achievements has been its ability to translate the latest research into practical, usable knowledge for clinicians. In a rapidly changing field like obstetrics and gynecology, where new studies and technologies emerge constantly, providing timely and relevant information has been essential. 

 has excelled in offering content that speaks directly to the needs of practitioners, ensuring that our busy colleagues have access to evidence-based guidance that enhances patient care.

Queenan’s pioneering leadership laid the groundwork for 

 to become a trusted voice in the ob-gyn community. His unwavering commitment to making complex topics accessible to busy clinicians set the tone for the journal’s success. Under his guidance, 

 became known for its evidence-driven content and clear, actionable insights, empowering practitioners to make informed decisions amid the busy pace of their practices. Whether discussing advances in prenatal care or diving into complex gynecological issues, Queenan’s vision ensured that every article was both relevant and practical.

Following Queenan, Charles Lockwood, MD, took the helm, building on what Queenan had created with his forward-thinking approach. Under his stewardship, 

 adapted to the rapidly changing landscape of the field. In addition, Lockwood elevated the journal with national award-winning editorials.

In 2020, I assumed the role of editor in chief, continuing the legacy of my mentors and colleagues Queenan and Lockwood. My goals included upholding an ongoing commitment to improving maternal and fetal health; championing patient-centered care; and ensuring that 

 continues to provide concise, clear, and simple information on complex topics, decipher the myriad of new studies and data, and provide context to understand how and whether they should change our care and management. I have worked to keep the journal at the forefront of the ob-gyn community, further enhancing its role as a vital resource for clinicians dedicated to improving patient outcomes.

 has mirrored the ongoing transformation within the field. From Queenan’s original vision to my leadership, the journal has stayed on the cutting edge, reflecting the latest research, technological advancements, and shifting paradigms in patient care. It has explored everything from maternal health disparities to innovative fertility treatments, always striving to offer a comprehensive, evidence-based perspective.

’s print edition, it is by no means the end of the journal. We are excited that 

 will continue to thrive in an online format. Our commitment to the busy practitioner remains unwavering.

We want to take a moment to express our deep appreciation to the many contributors who have helped shape this journal over the years: our visionary editors; expert authors; and, most importantly, the dedicated clinicians who have relied on 

 as a trusted source of information. This final print edition is a celebration of our legacy and the profound impact the journal has had on the profession. Thank you for being a part of this incredible journey. We look forward to continuing our work together in the digital age and beyond. Here’s to the next chapter of 

Marking the end of an era and the beginning of a new chapter, the final print edition of Contemporary OB/GYN celebrates over 50 years of evidence-based guidance and unwavering support for clinicians.

A legacy of excellence: Reflecting on the final print edition of Contemporary OB/GYN

In a recent interview ObGyn.net conducted for 

 on comprehensive care and cancer screenings at well-woman visits, the topic of stethoscopes came up. Ilene S. Gewirtz, MD, the interviewee, mentioned that she still carries a stethoscope and listens to her patients' heart and lungs at well-woman visits. She also said that she believes she's in the minority regarding this practice. We want to know if she's right.

POLL: Many women consider their OB/GYN their primary care provider. But like your primary care counterpart, do you carry a stethoscope?

Jill Liss, MD, MSCP, FACOG

Articles

Latest Updated Articles