Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36258184›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022

The acceptability of asking women to delay removal of a long-acting reversible contraceptive to take part in a preconception weight loss programme: a mixed methods study using qualitative and routine data (Plan-it).

Susan Channon, Elinor Coulman, Rebecca Cannings-John, Josie Henley, Mandy Lau, Fiona Lugg-Widger, Heather Strange, Freya Davies, Julia Sanders, Caroline Scherf and 2 more

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 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Structural weight stigma in healthcare toward preconception, pregnant, and postpartum women: A systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Preconception indicators and associations with health outcomes reported in UK routine primary care data: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Susan ChannonCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK. channons2@cardiff.ac.uk.
Elinor CoulmanCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Rebecca Cannings-JohnCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Josie HenleyCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Mandy LauCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Fiona Lugg-WidgerCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Heather StrangeCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Freya DaviesThe Welsh Centre for Primary and Emergency Care Research (PRIME), Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th floor, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Julia SandersSchool of Healthcare Sciences, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Ty Dewi Sant, Cardiff, CF14 4XN, UK.
Caroline ScherfDepartment of Sexual Health, Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff Royal Infirmary, Newport Road, Cardiff, CF24 0SZ, UK.
Zoe CouzensHealth Protection, Public Health Wales NHS Trust, Public Health Wales, 4th Floor Number 2 Capital Quarter, Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF10 4BZ, UK.
Leah MorantzIndependent Patient Representative, Cardiff, UK.
Cardiff University · GBCardiff and Vale University Health Board · GBPublic Health Wales · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHaving a body mass index (BMI) which is classified as overweight (BMI ≥ 25) or obese (BMI ≥ 30) increases the risk of complications during pregnancy and labour. Weight-management interventions which target excess gestational weight gain during pregnancy have had limited success. Women who use long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) are in contact with services as part of their preparation for conception, creating a potential opportunity to offer a preconception weight-loss intervention. The aims of this mixed methods study were to assess the acceptability and practicability of a weight-loss intervention which asked people to delay LARC removal in order to lose weight before conceiving.

methodsRoutine UK NHS data were analysed to identify pathways from LARC removal to pregnancy. Qualitative surveys and advisory group discussions with service providers and LARC users with experience of being overweight were conducted and analysed thematically.

resultsThree hundred fifteen thousand seven hundred fifty-five UK women aged 16-48 years between 2009-2018 had at least one LARC-related event (e.g. insertion, removal) and 1.7% of those events were recorded as related to planning a pregnancy. BMI was included in 62% of women's records, with 54% of those BMI being classified as overweight or obese. Online surveys were completed by 100 healthcare practitioners and 243 LARC users. Stakeholders identified facilitators and barriers associated with the proposed intervention including sensitivities of discussing weight, service-user past experiences, practitioner skills, the setting and ethical implications of the proposed intervention.

conclusionsAlthough women and service providers recognised potential benefits, a preconception weight-loss intervention asking people to delay LARC removal posed many barriers, due mainly to the acceptability of such an intervention to women and healthcare practitioners. Weight-loss interventions that target the general population, together with a focus on improving public knowledge of preconception health, may be more acceptable than interventions which solely focus on LARC users. Many of the barriers identified, including communication, understanding and beliefs about weight and risk, appointment systems and the limitations of routine datasets also have relevance for any preconception weight-loss intervention. Work to improve routine datasets and reducing communication barriers to discussing weight are priorities.

trial registrationISRCTN14733020 registered 10.05.2019.

Indexed as

Contraceptive AgentsWeight Reduction ProgramsContraceptionContraceptive DevicesFemaleHumansObesityOverweightPregnancyContraceptive AgentsContraceptionLong-acting reversible contraceptivesObesityPreconceptionRoutine dataWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID36258184
PMCPMC9580156
OpenAlexW4306742287

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.