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.
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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Telehealth Interventions Delivering Home-based Support Group Videoconferencing: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Factors that impact on the use of mechanical ventilation weaning protocols in critically ill adults and children: a qualitative evidence-synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Effects of lower tiers of government healthcare facilities on unmet need for contraception and contraception use in Bangladesh.PloS one · 2023Article
- Scoping review of risk factors of and interventions for adolescent repeat pregnancies: A public health perspective.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2018Article
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings: introduction to the series.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 6: how to assess relevance of the data.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 2: how to make an overall CERQual assessment of confidence and create a Summary of Qualitative Findings table.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 4: how to assess coherence.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 5: how to assess adequacy of data.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 3: how to assess methodological limitations.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.