Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28432063›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2017

A realist review to explore how low-income pregnant women use food vouchers from the UK's Healthy Start programme.

Heather Ohly, Nicola Crossland, Fiona Dykes, Nicola Lowe, Victoria Hall-Moran

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Using realist approaches in nutrition and dietetics research.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    2017
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Heather OhlyCollege of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Nicola CrosslandCollege of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Fiona DykesCollege of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Nicola LoweCollege of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Victoria Hall-MoranCollege of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore how low-income pregnant women use Healthy Start food vouchers, the potential impacts of the programme, and which women might experience these impacts and why.

designA realist review. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Primary or empirical studies (of any design) were included if they contributed relevant evidence or insights about how low-income women use food vouchers from the Healthy Start (UK) or the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) programmes. The assessment of 'relevance' was deliberately broad to ensure that reviewers remained open to new ideas from a variety of sources of evidence. ANALYSIS: A combination of evidence synthesis and realist analysis techniques was used to modify, refine and substantiate programme theories, which were constructed as explanatory 'context-mechanism-outcome'-configurations.

results38 primary studies were included in this review: four studies on Healthy Start and 34 studies on WIC. Two main outcome strands were identified: dietary improvements (intended) and financial assistance (unintended). Three evidence-informed programme theories were proposed to explain how aspects of context (and mechanisms) may generate these outcomes: the 'relative value' of healthy eating (prioritisation of resources); retailer discretion (pressure to 'bend the rules'); the influence of other family members (disempowerment).

conclusionsThis realist review suggests that some low-income pregnant women may use Healthy Start vouchers to increase their consumption of fruits and vegetables and plain cow's milk, whereas others may use them to reduce food expenditure and save money for other things.

Indexed as

Nutritional StatusNutrition PolicyDairy ProductsFemaleFood AssistanceHealth PromotionHumansMalnutritionMorbidityPovertyPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsSocioeconomic FactorsUnited Kingdomfoodpregnantrealistreviewvoucherswomen

Identifiers

PMID28432063
PMCPMC5594208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.