ArticleArchives of women's mental health2019
Obstetric patients' perspectives on functional magnetic neuroimaging research in pregnant women.
Article in Archives of women's mental health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interoception in pregnancy: Implications for peripartum depression.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2024Review
- Article
- Specification of Change Mechanisms in Pregnant Smokers for Malleable Target Identification: A Novel Approach to a Tenacious Public Health Problem.Frontiers in public 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Magnetic resonance neuroimaging (MRI) studies of healthy pregnant women could identify key mechanisms of spontaneous health behavior changes observed in expectant mothers as novel intervention targets, but are currently unprecedented. As balancing potential benefits of research with unknown risks, including participant perceptions of risk, is foundational to ethical conduct, we surveyed a convenience obstetric sample to understand pregnant women's perspectives on this issue. Respondents were 76 pregnant women (modal age of 30-39 years; 64% multiparous) presenting for obstetric care from April to June 2016 at privately and publicly funded clinics at an urban academic medical center in the Midwestern USA. Following a written description about functional magnetic resonance neuroimaging (fMRI) and its known and unknown risks, women were queried on their willingness to participate in a hypothetical study involving fMRI during pregnancy, and specific concerns about doing so, if hesitant or unwilling. Willingness to participate was "yes" (28.4%, n = 21), "maybe" (28.4%, n = 21), and "no" (43.2%, n = 32). Among those responding "maybe" or "no" (n = 53, 73.6%), 11 women (20.7%) articulated concern about the fetus. Other concerns expressed were time commitment (n = 11, 20.7%) and discomfort being in an MRI machine (n = 4; 7.5%). Pregnant women may be open to participating in research involving MRI provided concerns about fetal health, time, and personal comfort are addressed.
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.