Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30137572›Full record

ArticleJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2019

Failures in reproductive health policy: overcoming the consequences and causes of inaction.

Jonathan Sher, John W Frank, Lawrence Doi, Linda de Caestecker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jonathan SherIndependent Consultant on Preconception Health, Edinburgh, UK.
John W FrankScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Lawrence DoiScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Linda de CaesteckerDirector of Public Health, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K023209/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is assumed that long-established research findings and internationally accepted evidence should, and will, be translated into policy and practice. Knowledge about what prevents harm and promotes health has, in fact, guided and resulted in numerous beneficial public health actions. However, such is not always the case. The authors examine three notable, and unwelcome, exceptions in the UK-all in the field of reproductive health and all focused on the period prior to pregnancy. The three examples of counterproductive inaction discussed are: fortifying flour with Vitamin B9 (folic acid); preventing foetal alcohol spectrum disorders; and reducing risks and better regulating a highly teratogenic medication (valproate). The adverse consequences, as well as the causes, of inaction are analysed for each example. Reasons for optimism, and recommendations for overcoming inaction, are also offered, in particular, greater priority should be accorded to preconception health, education and care.

Indexed as

Health PolicyReproductive HealthFemaleFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisordersFlourFolic AcidFood, FortifiedHumansInformed ConsentNeural Tube DefectsPregnancyTeratogensUnited KingdomValproic AcidFolic AcidTeratogensValproic Acidevidence-based policyfetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD)folic acidpreconception healthpregnancyprevention of birth defects(public) health policyreproductive healthvalproate

Identifiers

PMID30137572
PMCPMC6636687

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.