ArticleBJGP open2024
How, when, and who should ask about pregnancy intentions in primary care? A qualitative study of primary healthcare professionals' preferences.
Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Understanding access to sexual and reproductive health in general practice using an adapted Candidacy Framework: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Using Intervention Mapping to Codevelop Orchid, a Digital Tool for Reproductive Life Planning: Development and Feasibility Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- "It's not about a question, it's about the outcomes, isn't it?": pilot study for Scottish pregnancy screening tool provision of preconception health care in Scotland.Reproductive health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnowing people's pregnancy intentions would help healthcare professionals (HCPs) to take a more holistic approach to reproductive health and preconception care.
aimTo assess the feasibility of implementation of questions about pregnancy preferences in a range of primary care settings in Great Britain, including digital implementation. DESIGN &
settingQualitative study using online semi-structured interviews with primary healthcare professionals across Great Britain between February and July 2022.
methodTwelve online interviews were conducted with GPs (
resultsHCPs perceived asking about pregnancy preferences as valuable in meeting patients' reproductive health needs and most suited to women's health consultations, medication and disease reviews, baby checks, or as an addition to lifestyle questions leading to health promotion advice. An introductory, non-discriminatory signposting sentence was well-liked, and the preferred question in a face-to-face clinical encounter was asking how the person would feel about a pregnancy in the next year, in line with women's preference. Guidance and training would give clinicians confidence in knowing how to ask about pregnancy preferences and advise their patients accordingly.
conclusionAsking about pregnancy intentions is acceptable to women and HCPs and feasible in primary care, but implementation needs to be adapted to the patient and context. Digital options that enable patients to self-manage can reduce the need for HCP input and avoid medicalising a normal process.
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.