ArticleBMJ public health2026
Pre-pregnancy primary care and accident and emergency interactions among interpreter-users versus non-interpreter-users in England: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Non-English-speaking migrant women who need interpreters face healthcare barriers, exacerbating maternal health inequalities. Primary care-based preconception interventions can reduce preconception risk factors but require patient engagement, which has been affected by COVID-19. We aimed to identify whether women interact with general practice (GP) and accident and emergency (A&E) in the year pre-pregnancy, differences between interpreter-users and non-interpreter-users, and changes during COVID-19. Methods: English population-wide linked patient-level administrative data including primary, secondary and maternity care were used. Women with estimated pregnancy start dates from 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2024, aged 18-49 were included.Outcomes were interactions with GP and A&E in the year pre-pregnancy (yes/no) according to interpreter-use. Outcomes were recorded according to pregnancy start date: 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2020 (pre-pregnancy-year pre-COVID-19-onset), 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 (pre-pregnancy-year overlapping with COVID-19-onset) or 1 March 2020 to 29 February 2024 (pre-pregnancy-year after COVID-19-onset). Logistic regression compared GP/A&E interaction pre-pregnancy among interpreter-users versus non-interpreter-users. Results: Among 2 182 280 women, 61 140 (2.8%) used interpreters. Median age was 31.0 among interpreter-users and 30.9 among non-interpreter-users. 49.7% (n=30 370) of interpreter-users were in the most deprived quintile versus 22.7% (n=480 470) of non-interpreter-users, and 62.5% (n=38 150) were of ethnic minorities (excluding white minorities) versus 22.1% (n=468 530) of non-interpreter-users.79.5% (n=48 625) of interpreter-users interacted with their GP pre-pregnancy, versus 85.0% (n=1 802 925) of non-interpreter-users. Interpreter-use was associated with lower adjusted odds of GP interaction (aOR 0.74 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.75)), with lower odds among women whose pre-pregnancy year was post-COVID-onset.Adjusted odds of A&E interaction in the year pre-pregnancy were lower among interpreter-users, with minimal change during COVID-19. Conclusions: Although interpreter-users were less likely to interact with GP, indicating barriers to healthcare access, most still did, making GP a promising avenue for addressing preconception health. Ensuring interpreter-need is recorded at GP registration is important. Widening inequalities since COVID-19 suggest a proactive approach is required to reduce inequalities.
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.