ArticleBMC public health2025
Engaging, recruiting, and retaining pregnant people from marginalized communities in environmental health cohort studies: a scoping review.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lessons learned from longitudinal biomonitoring and birth cohort studies: informing the future of reproductive health research in Canada.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2026Article
- Editorial Synthesis for, 'Parenting Across the Lifespan: Perinatal Mental Health, Infant Feeding, and Child Development'.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Article
- Racial and Ethnic Representation in Studies of Psychological Trauma During Pregnancy in the United States.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Review
- Barriers and strategies for recruitment of pregnant women in contemporary longitudinal birth cohort studies.BMC medical research methodology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify barriers to and strategies for improving the representation of pregnant people from marginalized communities in pregnancy cohort studies that measure environmental chemicals.
methodsGuided by the Arksey O'Malley and Levac Frameworks, we conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature published between 2000 and 2022. Included studies discussed barriers and/or strategies related to engaging, recruiting, and retaining pregnant participants or participants of reproductive age from marginalized communities into environmental health research.
resultsTwenty-nine peer-reviewed articles were included in the review. Overall, 31% (9/29) of the studies reported on engagement, recruitment, and retention of participants from racialized communities, 10% (3/29) reported on involvement of participants identifying as Indigenous, and 10% (3/29) of studies reported on participants living in households or areas of low socioeconomic status. We identified four key barriers: participant burden, social inequities, lack of trust, and lack of cultural relevance. We reported identified strategies to mitigate these barriers.
conclusionAlthough there is limited coverage in the literature on strategies to effectively engage people from marginalized communities in environmental health pregnancy cohort studies, our findings suggest that applying a health equity and social justice lens to research may help address barriers that exist at the individual, interpersonal, community, institutional, and policy levels. Findings from this review may have important implications for planning future pregnancy cohort studies and ensuring that communities who are disproportionately affected by environmental chemical exposures may be better represented in research and considered in policy decisions.
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.