ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2012
Mothers with intellectual disability and their babies: a population warranting special consideration.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Perinatal Care for Women With Intellectual Disabilities: Clinician Insights on Involving Family Caregivers.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026Article
- Clinician-reported barriers to providing perinatal care to women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.Journal of intellectual & developmental disability · 2023Article
- Pregnancy course, infant outcomes, rehospitalization, and mortality among women with intellectual disability.Disability and health journal · 2019Article
- Exploring the prenatal experience of women with intellectual and developmental disabilities: In a southeastern Ontario family health team.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biological factors and/or the mothers' social-environmental situation may be responsible for the much higher relative risk for pregnant intellectually disabled women and their newborns reported in articles by Höglund et al. in this issue. This population has increased exposure to key social determinants of health such as poverty and social exclusion. This is compounded by institutional discriminatory beliefs and practices. People with intellectual disability may also struggle to communicate their needs effectively and to be heard and understood by health professionals. Further research is warranted to understand the reasons for two stand-out findings: why rates of stillbirth and perinatal death are significantly higher in this group and whether varying obstetric practices are responsible for the significantly lower use of pain relief during childbirth. Quality health care requires that due attention is given to meeting the specific needs of this vulnerable group of mothers and their newborns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.