Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36151510›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022

Women's knowledge, attitudes and views of preconception health and intervention delivery methods: a cross-sectional survey.

Michael P Daly, James White, Julia Sanders, Ruth R Kipping

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  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. 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
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael P DalyBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. michael.daly@bristol.ac.uk.
James WhiteSchool of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Julia SandersSchool of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Ruth R KippingBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Cardiff University · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

UK Research and Innovation MR/N0137941/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral preconception exposures have been associated with adverse pregnancy, birth and postpartum outcomes. However, few studies have investigated women's knowledge of and attitudes towards preconception health, and the acceptability of potential intervention methods.

methodsSeven primary care centres in the West of England posted questionnaires to 4330 female patients aged 18 to 48 years. Without providing examples, we asked women to list maternal preconception exposures that might affect infant and maternal outcomes, and assessed their knowledge of nine literature-derived risk factors. Attitudes towards preconception health (interest, intentions, self-efficacy and perceived awareness and importance) and the acceptability of intervention delivery methods were also assessed. Multivariable multilevel regression examined participant characteristics associated with these outcomes.

resultsOf those who received questionnaires, 835 (19.3%) responded. Women were most aware of the preconception risk factors of diet (86.0%) and physical activity (79.2%). Few were aware of weight (40.1%), folic acid (32.9%), abuse (6.3%), advanced age (5.9%) and interpregnancy intervals (0.2%), and none mentioned interpregnancy weight change or excess iron intake. After adjusting for demographic and reproductive covariates, women aged 18-24-years (compared to 40-48-year-olds) and nulligravid women were less aware of the benefit of preconception folic acid supplementation (adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for age: 4.30 [2.10-8.80], gravidity: aOR 2.48 [1.70-3.62]). Younger women were more interested in learning more about preconception health (aOR 0.37 [0.21-0.63]) but nulligravid women were less interested in this (aOR 1.79 [1.30-2.46]). Women with the lowest household incomes (versus the highest) were less aware of preconception weight as a risk factor (aOR: 3.11 [1.65-5.84]) and rated the importance of preconception health lower (aOR 3.38 [1.90-6.00]). The most acceptable information delivery methods were websites/apps (99.5%), printed healthcare materials (98.6%), family/partners (96.3%), schools (94.4%), television (91.9%), pregnancy tests (91.0%) and doctors, midwives and nurses (86.8-97.0%). Dentists (23.9%) and hairdressers/beauticians (18.1%) were the least acceptable.

conclusionsOur findings demonstrate a need to promote awareness of preconception risk factors and motivation for preconception health changes, particularly amongst younger and nulligravid women and women with lower incomes. Interventions to improve preconception health should focus on communication from healthcare professionals, schools, family members, and digital media.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePreconception CareChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFolic AcidHumansInternetIronPregnancyFolic AcidIronCross-sectional studiesHealth knowledge, attitudes, practiceIntervention developmentPreconception careSurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36151510
PMCPMC9508727
OpenAlexW4297184396

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.