Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36062126›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Perceptions of and challenges faced by primary healthcare workers about preconception services in rural India: A qualitative study using focus group discussion.

Amruta Paresh Chutke, Prakash Prabhakarrao Doke, Jayashree Sachin Gothankar, Prasad Dnyandeo Pore, Sonali Hemant Palkar, Archana Vasantrao Patil, Aniruddha Vinayakrao Deshpande, Khanindra Kumar Bhuyan, Madhusudan Vaman Karnataki, Aparna Nishikant Shrotri

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amruta Paresh ChutkeDepartment of Community Medicine, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Medical College, Pune, India.
Prakash Prabhakarrao DokeDepartment of Community Medicine, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Medical College, Pune, India.
Jayashree Sachin GothankarDepartment of Community Medicine, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Medical College, Pune, India.
Prasad Dnyandeo PoreDepartment of Community Medicine, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Medical College, Pune, India.
Sonali Hemant PalkarDepartment of Community Medicine, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Medical College, Pune, India.
Archana Vasantrao PatilState Family Welfare Bureau, Department of Public Health, Government of Maharashtra, Pune, India.
Aniruddha Vinayakrao DeshpandeState Family Welfare Bureau, Department of Public Health, Government of Maharashtra, Pune, India.
Khanindra Kumar BhuyanUnited Nations Children's Funds (UNICEF), Mumbai, India.
Madhusudan Vaman KarnatakiUnited Nations Children's Funds (UNICEF), Mumbai, India.
Aparna Nishikant ShrotriUnited Nations Children's Funds (UNICEF), Mumbai, India.
Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University · INUnited Nations Children's Fund India · INGovernment of Maharashtra · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Providing preconception care through healthcare workers at the primary health care level is a crucial intervention to reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes, consequently reducing neonatal mortality. Despite the availability of evidence, this window of opportunity remains unaddressed in many countries, including India. The public health care system is primarily accessed by rural and tribal Indian population. It is essential to know the frontline healthcare workers perception about preconception care. The study aimed to identify barriers and suggestions for framing appropriate strategies for implementing preconception care through primary health centers. Methods: The authors conducted a qualitative study using focus group discussions (FGDs) with 45 healthcare workers in four FGDs (8-14 participants in each), in four blocks of Nashik district. The transcribed discussions were analyzed in MAXQDA software using the Socio-Ecological Model as an initial coding guide, including four levels of factors (individual, interpersonal, community, and institutional) that influenced an individual's behavior to use preconception care services. Results: Healthcare workers had some knowledge about preconception care, limited to adolescent health and family planning services. The interpersonal factors included heavy workload, stress, lack of support and co-operation, and paucity of appreciation, and motivation. The perceived community factors included poverty, migration, poor knowledge of preconception care, lack of felt need for preconception services, the influence of older women in the household decision, low male involvement, myths and misconceptions regarding preconception services. The identified institutional factors were lack of human resources, specialized services, logistics, and challenges in delivering adolescent health and family planning programs. Healthcare workers suggested the need for program-specific guidelines, training and capacity building of human resources, an un-interrupted supply of logistics, and a unique community awareness drive supporting preconception care services. Conclusion: Multi-level factors of the Socio-Ecological Model influencing the preconception care services should be considered for framing strategies in the implementation of comprehensive preconception care as a part of a continuum of care for life cycle phases of women.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelRural PopulationAdolescentAgedFemaleFocus GroupsHumansIndiaInfant, NewbornMalePregnancyQualitative Researchchallengesfocus group discussionhealthcare workerspreconception carequalitative researchSocio-Ecological Modelsuggestions

Identifiers

PMID36062126
PMCPMC9432348
OpenAlexW4294666877

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.