Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24722200›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2014

Intervention Now To Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement.

Rh Whitaker, M Hendry, A Booth, B Carter, J Charles, N Craine, R T Edwards, M Lyons, J Noyes, D Pasterfield and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rh WhitakerNorth Wales Organisation for Randomised Trials in Health, Y Wern, Normal Site, Holyhead Road, Bangor University, Bangor, Gwynedd, UK.
M Hendry
A Booth
B Carter
J Charles
N Craine
R T Edwards
M Lyons
J Noyes
D Pasterfield
J Rycroft-Malone
N Williams
Bangor University · GBCardiff University · GBPublic Health Wales · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe UK has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in Western Europe, a fifth are repeat pregnancies. Unintended conceptions can result in emotional, psychological and educational harm to teenage girls, often with enduring implications for their life chances. Babies of teenage mothers have increased mortality in their first year and increased risk of poverty, educational underachievement and unemployment later in life, with associated societal costs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a streamed, mixed-methods systematic review to find and evaluate interventions designed to reduce repeat unintended teen pregnancies. OUR AIMS ARE TO IDENTIFY: Who is at greater risk of repeat unintended pregnancies? Which interventions are effective, cost-effective, how they work, in what setting and for whom? What are the barriers and facilitators to intervention uptake? Traditional electronic database searches will be augmented by targeted searches for evidence 'clusters' and guided by an advisory group of experts and stakeholders. To address the topic's inherent complexities, we will use a highly structured, innovative and iterative approach combining methodological techniques tailored to each stream of evidence. Quantitative data will be synthesised with reference to Cochrane guidelines for public health interventions. Qualitative evidence addressing facilitators and barriers to the uptake of interventions, experience and acceptability of interventions will be synthesised thematically. We will apply the principles of realist synthesis to uncover theories and mechanisms underpinning interventions. We will conduct an integration and overarching narrative of findings authenticated by client group feedback. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will publish the complete review in 'Health Technology Assessment' and sections in specialist peer-reviewed journals. We will present at national and international conferences in the fields of public health, reproductive medicine and review methodology. Findings will be fed back to service users and practitioners via workshops run by the partner collaborators. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42012003168. COCHRANE REGISTRATION NUMBER: i=fertility/0068.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesPregnancy in AdolescencePregnancy, UnplannedAdolescentCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHealth PolicyHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnancyQualitative ResearchRecurrenceRisk FactorsUnited KingdomReproductive Medicine

Identifiers

PMID24722200
PMCPMC3987728
OpenAlexW4235052703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.