Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33938274›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2021

Who cares for women with children? Crossing the bridge between disciplines.

Emily H Emmott, Sarah Myers, Abigail E Page

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Dynamics of cooperative networks associated with gender among South Indian Tamils.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  4. Sedentarization and maternal childcare networks: role of risk, gender and demography.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Testing the buffering hypothesis: Breastfeeding problems, cessation, and social support in the UK.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Male partner participation in maternity care and social support for childbearing women: a discussion paper.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Emily H EmmottUCL Anthropology, University College London, 14 Taviton Street, London WC1H 0BW, UK.
Sarah MyersUCL Anthropology, University College London, 14 Taviton Street, London WC1H 0BW, UK.
Abigail E PageDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P014216/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has long been acknowledged that women with children require social support to promote their health and wellbeing, as well as that of their children. However, the dominant conceptualizations of support have been heavily influenced by Western family norms. The consequence, at best, has been to stifle our understanding of the nature and consequences of support for mothers and children. At worst, it has led to systematic discrimination negatively impacting maternal-child health. To fully engage with the complexities of social support, we must take multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary approaches spanning diverse cultural and geographical perspectives. However, multidisciplinary knowledge-processing can be challenging, and it is often unclear how different studies from different disciplines relate. To address this, we outline two epistemological frameworks-the scientific approach and Tinbergen's four questions-that can be useful tools in connecting research across disciplines. In this theme issue on 'Multidisciplinary perspectives on social support and maternal-child health', we attempt to foster multidisciplinary thinking by presenting work from a diverse range of disciplines, populations and cultures. Our hope is that these tools, along with papers in this issue, help to build a holistic understanding of social support and its consequences for mothers and their children. Overall, a multidisciplinary perspective points to how the responsibility of childrearing should not fall solely onto mothers. Indeed, this multidisciplinary issue demonstrates that successful childrearing is consistently an activity shared beyond the mother and the nuclear family: an insight that is crucial to harnessing the potential of social support to improve maternal-child health. This article is part of the theme issue 'Multidisciplinary perspectives on social support and maternal-child health'.

Indexed as

Child HealthMaternal HealthMothersSocial SupportFemaleHumanscooperative childrearinginterdisciplinarymaternal–child healthmultidisciplinarysocial support

Identifiers

PMID33938274
PMCPMC8090823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.