ArticleJournal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction2022
Improving prenatal care during lockdown: Comparing telehealth and in-person care for low-risk pregnant women in the PROTECT pilot study.
Article in Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04368832 (ImPROving prenaTal carE During ConfinemenT), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
ImPROving prenaTal carE During ConfinemenT: Impact of Confinement on the Quality of Prenatal Care Perceived in Low-risk Pregnancy
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding health education needs of pregnant women in China during public health emergencies: a qualitative study amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Impact of Telehealth Prenatal Care at a Federally Qualified Health Center.Journal of midwifery & women's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto compare telehealth and in-person care during the COVID-19 lockdown in a population of low-risk pregnant women for prenatal care received and perinatal outcome.
methodsThis single-center study began during the first French lockdown in 2020. Women with at least one telehealth (remote) prenatal care visit were compared with those who received care only in person. Data include results from self-administered surveys and perinatal outcomes. The main outcome was the prenatal care experience, assessed by the 5-point Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ) score. Exploratory analyses sought to identify connections between perinatal outcomes and any of their levels of QPCQ score, health/eHealth literacy, stress, and social deprivation scores .
resultsThe experimental group included 55 women and the control group 52. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups. The mean QPCQ scores did not support any difference between the mothers' experience of prenatal care in each group: 4.15±0.52 in the telehealth and 4.26±0.63 in the in-person groups. Similarly, levels of social deprivation, stress, and health and eHealth literacy did not differ between the groups.
conclusionRegardless of social deprivation or literacy level, both telehealth and in-person monitoring appeared to provide equivalent and good-quality prenatal care experiences during the pandemic, ClinicalTrial.gov registration NCT04368832 (30
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.