Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35909247›Full record

ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2022

Screening for adverse childhood experiences in antenatal care settings: A scoping review.

Nam Tran, Leonie Callaway, Sitong Shen, Tuhin Biswas, James G Scott, Fran Boyle, Abdullah Mamun

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nam TranInstitute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0794-881X
Leonie CallawayDepartment of Obstetric Medicine, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Metro North and Health Service, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Sitong ShenSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1398-2448
Tuhin BiswasInstitute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7837-0306
James G ScottMetro North Mental Health Service, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0744-0688
Fran BoyleInstitute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1665-2137
Abdullah MamunInstitute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1535-8086
The University of Queensland · AUQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AU

Funding

ARC Centre of Excellence for Children and Family over the Life Course CE200100025ISSR-UQ Winter Research Program 2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with many health problems in women during pregnancy, including depression/anxiety, gestational diabetes and adverse birth outcomes. However, unlike other health risk factors, screening for ACEs has not been widely implemented in antenatal care settings.

aimsThe aim of the scoping review was to explore the challenges in screening for ACEs in antenatal care settings and to provide the lessons learnt and evidence that guide the practice of ACE screening for both healthcare providers and pregnant women.

methodsA five-stage process for conducting the scoping review was utilised. Searches of four key databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and SCOPUS) and reference lists from relevant studies were conducted.

resultsSeven publications met the inclusion criteria. Challenges identified for healthcare providers in screening for ACEs include lack of knowledge and confidence in ACE tool and shortage of time and resources to undertake screening. Impediments for pregnant women include concerns about privacy. However, there were examples of effective practice for ACE screening in antenatal care settings that could apply widely.

conclusionAddressing impediments to ACE screening is critical in implementing trauma-informed practices that can identify women at risk of adverse health outcomes during pregnancy. A study on screening for ACEs in antenatal care in both public and private settings is needed to examine its feasibility and acceptability in the Australian context before being included in the National Perinatal Data Collection.

Indexed as

Adverse Childhood ExperiencesPrenatal CareAustraliaFemaleHumansParturitionPregnancyTaurineN-(2-acetamido)-2-aminoethanesulfonic acidTaurineadverse childhood experiencesantenatal carepregnant womenscoping reviewscreening.

Identifiers

PMID35909247
PMCPMC9796324
OpenAlexW4289132937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.