ArticleIranian journal of reproductive medicine2015
Prevention of birth defects in the pre-conception period: knowledge and practice of health care professionals (nurses and doctors) in a city of Southern Brazil.
Article in Iranian journal of reproductive medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary healthcare practitioners in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review on genetics.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Genetic knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing among final-year medical students at a public university in Ecuador.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Maternal polymorphic loci of rs1979277International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2021Article
- Primary health care nursing students' knowledge of and attitude towards the provision of preconception care in KwaZulu-Natal.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2019Article
- Under-reporting of major birth defects in Northwest Russia: a registry-based study.International journal of circumpolar health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome congenital defects can be prevented in the pregestational stage. However, many health professionals are not prepared to provide counselling to couples regarding the same.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the performance of doctors and nurses from a primary health-care unit in Florianopolis, Brazil, in preventing birth defects in the preconception period based on the recommendations of the Control Center of Disease Prevention. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis descriptive cross sectional study was performed at a tertiary referral center. In this study, a semi-structured questionnaire was provided to 160 health professionals comprising doctors and nurses who were actively involved in providing primary health care in family health programs. The non-parametric Chi-square (χ(2)) test was used to analyse the data obtained through multiple choice questions.
resultsOur results showed that although 81.9% of health professionals provided health-care assistance based on protocols, and only 46.2% professionals were aware of the presence of the topic in the protocol. Of the recommendations provided by the Control Center of Disease Prevention, the use of folic acid was the most prescribed. However, this prescription was not statistically different between nurses and doctors (P=0.85).
conclusionThis study identified the fragile nature in these professional's knowledge about the prevention of birth defects in pre-conception period, as evidenced by the inconsistency in their responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26644794PMC4668353What 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.