ArticleAmerican journal of public health2014
Moving toward evidence-based federal Healthy Start program evaluations: accounting for bias in birth outcomes studies.
Article in American journal of public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of a Large Healthy Start Program on Perinatal Outcomes, South Carolina, 2009-2019.American journal of public health · 2023Article
- A Methodological Approach for Evaluating the Enterprise Community Healthy Start Program in Rural Georgia: An Analysis Using Linked PRAMS, Birth Records and Program Data.Maternal and child health journal · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the Implementation of the Healthy Start Program: Findings from the 2016 National Healthy Start Program Survey.Maternal and child health journal · 2019Article
- Defining the Role of the Community Health Worker within a Federal Healthy Start Care Coordination Team.Maternal and child health journal · 2017Article
- Understanding Perspectives of African American Medicaid-Insured Women on the Process of Perinatal Care: An Opportunity for Systems Improvement.Maternal and child health journal · 2017Article
- Perinatal program evaluations: methods, impacts, and future goals.Maternal and child health journal · 2015Review
- Determining County-Level Counterfactuals for Evaluation of Population Health Interventions: A Novel Application ofPublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We used administrative and screening data from 2009 to 2010 to determine if Healthy Start (HS), an enhanced prenatal services program, is reaching the most vulnerable African American women in Kent County, Michigan. Women in HS are at higher risk of key predictors of birth outcomes compared with other women. To advance toward evidence-based HS program evaluations in the absence of randomized controlled trials, future studies using comparison groups need to appropriately establish baseline equivalence on a variety of risk factors related to birth outcomes.
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.