ArticlePublic health nutrition2024
Adherence to the national guidance on foods and drinks to limit or avoid during pregnancy in England: the PEAR Study.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Provision of information by midwives for pregnant women in England on guidance on foods/drinks to avoid or limit.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe National Health Service (NHS) England website provides guidance on foods/drinks to avoid or limit during pregnancy because of microbiological, toxicological or teratogenic hazards. The aims were to determine adherence and whether demographic characteristics were associated with adherence.
designCross-sectional study.
settingOnline survey of postpartum women resident in England during pregnancy.
participantsRecently, postpartum women resident in England during their pregnancy (
resultsAdherence was generally high (>90 % for eight of ten food/drink items to be avoided). However, among pre-pregnancy consumers, several items were not completely avoided, for example, 81 % (128/158) for game meat/gamebirds, 37 % (176/478) for cured meats and 17 % (81/467) for soft cheeses. Greater educational attainment (e.g. caffeinated soft drinks OR 2·25 (95 % CI 1·28, 3·94)), greater maternal age (e.g. oily fish 1·64 (1·05, 2·56)) and lower parity (e.g. caffeinated coffee 0.28 (0.11, 0.69)) were the most usual characteristics associated with adherence.
conclusionEvidence of concerning levels of non-adherence for some food/drink items suggests a case for more education on some of the guidance, particularly for women with lower educational attainment, greater parity and greater maternal age. Further research on barriers to the implementation of the guidance is needed.
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.