Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34315424›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Health behaviours in 131,182 UK women planning pregnancy.

Beth McDougall, Kimberley Kavanagh, Judith Stephenson, Lucilla Poston, Angela C Flynn, Sara L White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. What Does 'Preconception Health' Mean to People? A Public Consultation on Awareness and Use of Language.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
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

6 authors.

Beth McDougallDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Kimberley KavanaghDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Judith StephensonEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 74 Huntley Street, WC1E 6AU, London, UK.
Lucilla PostonDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, 10th Floor North Wing, St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, SE1 7EH, London, UK.
Angela C Flynn *Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, 10th Floor North Wing, St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, SE1 7EH, London, UK.
Sara L White *Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, 10th Floor North Wing, St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, SE1 7EH, London, UK. sara.white@kcl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA woman's health at the time of conception lays the foundation for a healthy pregnancy and the lifelong health of her child. We investigated the health behaviours of UK women planning pregnancy.

methodsWe analysed survey data from the 'Planning for Pregnancy' online tool (Tommy's, UK). We described all women planning pregnancy and compared the frequency of non-adherence to preconception recommendations in women who had already stopped contraception (active planners) and those who had not (non-active planners).

resultsOne hundred thirty-one thousand one hundred eighty-two women from across the UK were included, of whom 64.8% were actively planning pregnancy. Of the whole cohort, twenty percent were smokers and less than one third took folic acid supplements (31.5%). Forty two percent engaged in less than the recommended 150 min of weekly physical activity and only 53.3% consumed five portions of fruit or vegetables 4 days a week. Smokers were 1.87 times more likely to be active planners than non-smokers (95% CI 1.79-1.94), and women who took folic acid were 7 times more likely to be active planners (95% CI 6.97-7.59) compared to women who did not. Smoking, drug use and lack of folic acid supplementation were common in younger women and those who were underweight.

conclusionsThis unique survey of UK women has identified poor adherence to preconception recommendations in those planning pregnancies and supports the need for a greater public health focus on preconception health. This study provides a contemporary basis from which to inform preconception health advice and a benchmark to measure changes over time.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePreconception CareAdultAlcohol DrinkingCaffeineCohort StudiesDietary SupplementsFemaleFolic AcidFruitHumansPregnancyRecreational Drug UseSmokingUnited KingdomCaffeineFolic AcidContraceptionPlanning for pregnancyPreconceptionPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID34315424
PMCPMC8317296

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.