SynthesisFamily practice2018
A systematic review of the effect of reproductive intention screening in primary care settings on reproductive health outcomes.
Synthesis in Family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Preexisting Diabetes and Pregnancy: An Endocrine Society and European Society of Endocrinology Joint Clinical Practice Guideline.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Guideline
- Preconception, Interconception, and reproductive health screening tools: A systematic review.Health services research · 2023Pooled it
- How, when, and who should ask about pregnancy intentions in primary care? A qualitative study of primary healthcare professionals' preferences.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Comparison of a person-centered pregnancy prevention question and One Key Question to assess postpartum contraceptive needs.Contraception · 2024Article
- Supporting reproductive health among birthing persons with chronic conditions in the United States: A qualitative multilevel study using systems thinking to inform action.Health services research · 2023Article
- Acceptability of reproductive goals assessment in public mental health care.Health services research · 2023Article
- Women's Perspectives on a Reproductive Health Services Screening Question: An Alternative to Pregnancy Intention Screening.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Clinic factors associated with utilization of a pregnancy-intention screening tool in community health centers.Contraception · 2021Observational
- A qualitative assessment of perspectives on getting pregnant: the Social Position and Family Formation study.Reproductive health · 2019Article
- Increase in Contraceptive Counseling by Primary Care Clinicians After Implementation of One Key Question® at an Urban Community Health Center.Maternal and child health journal · 2019Article
- Integrating interconception care in preventive child health care services: The Healthy Pregnancy 4 All program.PloS one · 2019Article
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
Abstract
Purpose: No recommendations exist for routine reproductive intention screening in primary care. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effect of reproductive intention screening in primary care on reproductive health outcomes (PROSPERO CRD42015019726). Methods: We performed a systematic search in Ovid Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, CDR/DARE databases, Web of Science, ISRCTN registry, Clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane Library. Studies published in English between 2000 and 2017 and whose population was patients of reproductive age (15-49) were included. Studies without a comparison group were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility, study quality and abstracted data. Results: Of 24 780 titles and/or abstracts reviewed, nine studies met inclusion criteria: four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five observational studies. Two RCTs and one quasi-experimental cohort study showed a statistically significant increase in knowledge related to healthier pregnancy, such as the benefits of folic acid supplementation, and increased risk profiles for those with chronic conditions. Among studies measuring contraceptive use, only one cohort study showed any increase while the RCT and retrospective cohort did not show a statistically significant effect. Neither of the two RCTs that assessed the provision of contraception by primary care providers for those not desiring pregnancy found increased access to contraception, although one found increased documentation of contraception in electronic medical records. Acceptability of reproductive intention screening was measured in seven studies, and participant satisfaction was high in all seven studies. Conclusions: More research is needed to determine whether routine inclusion of reproductive intention screening in primary care is warranted.
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.