ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
Understanding Preferences for Preconception Care in Australia: Insights From a Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organisation, Financing, and Implementation of Preconception Care in Primary Care: Implications for Women's Health and Well-Being.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Understanding Preferences for Preconception Care in Australia: Insights From a Discrete Choice Experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
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
backgroundPreconception care (PCC) aims to optimise health before pregnancy by addressing risk factors. This improves conception rates, pregnancy outcomes, and the health of future generations. Despite its benefits, preconception care in Australia is underutilised due to the rate of unplanned pregnancies and inadequate care before pregnancy. Evidence is lacking on consumer preferences for PCC services.
methodsA discrete choice experiment was designed to investigate preferences of Australian adults for the delivery of PCC services in primary care. An online survey including 12 choice tasks describing alternate PCC service configurations was completed by a sample of the general population. Data were analysed using mixed logit and latent class models to identify key attributes influencing decision-making and explore preference heterogeneity.
resultsA total of 485 respondents of a generally representative sample of Australian adults completed the online survey. Most respondents (67%) indicated that they had either not heard of PCC or were unsure if they had. Choice modelling results indicated strong preferences for PCC services delivered face-to-face, particularly by specialist obstetricians. Lower out-of-pocket costs and the inclusion of incentives were also important drivers of preferences.
conclusionsIncreasing awareness of PCC and its importance to the health of parents and babies is essential to improve uptake. Reducing costs and offering incentives may further encourage engagement with PCC services. The results highlight the lack of knowledge concerning the skills of nurse practitioners and pharmacists who are well placed to contribute to PCC delivery in primary care.
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.