Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29673875›Full record

ReviewLancet (London, England)2018

Intervention strategies to improve nutrition and health behaviours before conception.

Mary Barker, Stephan U Dombrowski, Tim Colbourn, Caroline H D Fall, Natasha M Kriznik, Wendy T Lawrence, Shane A Norris, Gloria Ngaiza, Dilisha Patel, Jolene Skordis-Worrall and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lancet (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 178 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
178citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
61.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

178 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 376 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Evaluating implementation of the FIGO Nutrition Checklist for preconception and pregnancy within the Bukhali trial in Soweto, South Africa.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2023
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

118 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Mary BarkerMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.
Stephan U DombrowskiFaculty of Natural Sciences, Division of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Tim ColbournUCL Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Caroline H D FallMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.
Natasha M KriznikThe Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Wendy T LawrenceMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.
Shane A NorrisMRC Developmental Pathways for Health Research Unit, Department of Paediatrics, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Gloria NgaizaUCL Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Dilisha PatelUCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Jolene Skordis-WorrallUCL Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Falko F SniehottaInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University and Fuse, the UK Clinical Research Collaboration Centre of Excellence for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Régine Steegers-TheunissenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, and Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Christina VogelMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK; NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK.
Kathryn Woods-TownsendNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK; Southampton Education School, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Judith StephensonUCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: judith.stephenson@ucl.ac.uk.
University College London · GBMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBErasmus MC · NLNewcastle University · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Stirling · GBUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

British Heart Foundation PG/14/33/30827Medical Research Council MC_PC_MR/R018545/1Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1017Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/4Medical Research Council MR/J000094/1Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1Medical Research Council MR/N011848/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nutritional status of both women and men before conception has profound implications for the growth, development, and long-term health of their offspring. Evidence of the effectiveness of preconception interventions for improving outcomes for mothers and babies is scarce. However, given the large potential health return, and relatively low costs and risk of harm, research into potential interventions is warranted. We identified three promising strategies for intervention that are likely to be scalable and have positive effects on a range of health outcomes: supplementation and fortification; cash transfers and incentives; and behaviour change interventions. On the basis of these strategies, we suggest a model specifying pathways to effect. Pathways are incorporated into a life-course framework using individual motivation and receptiveness at different preconception action phases, to guide design and targeting of preconception interventions. Interventions for individuals not planning immediate pregnancy take advantage of settings and implementation platforms outside the maternal and child health arena, since this group is unlikely to be engaged with maternal health services. Interventions to improve women's nutritional status and health behaviours at all preconception action phases should consider social and environmental determinants, to avoid exacerbating health and gender inequalities, and be underpinned by a social movement that touches the whole population. We propose a dual strategy that targets specific groups actively planning a pregnancy, while improving the health of the population more broadly. Modern marketing techniques could be used to promote a social movement based on an emotional and symbolic connection between improved preconception maternal health and nutrition, and offspring health. We suggest that speedy and scalable benefits to public health might be achieved through strategic engagement with the private sector. Political theory supports the development of an advocacy coalition of groups interested in preconception health, to harness the political will and leadership necessary to turn high-level policy into effective coordinated action.

Indexed as

Prenatal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaFemaleFinancial SupportHealth BehaviorHumansPreconception CarePregnancyPublic HealthPublic Policy

Identifiers

PMID29673875
PMCPMC6075694
OpenAlexW2794603072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.