Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27680206›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2016

Perinatal health care services for imprisoned pregnant women and associated outcomes: a systematic review.

Eleanor Bard, Marian Knight, Emma Plugge

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Needs of Incarcerated Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review of Literature.International journal of community based nursing and midwifery · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. "Women & criminal justice · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. "I Wish I Could Hold Your Hand": Inconsistent Interactions Between Pregnant Women and Prison Officers.Journal of correctional health care : the official journal of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eleanor BardOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust/Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK. elliebard@gmail.com.
Marian KnightNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Emma PluggeCentre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen are an increasing minority of prisoners worldwide, and most are of childbearing age. Prisons offer unique opportunities for improving the pregnancy outcomes of these high-risk women, and no systematic review to date has looked at their care. This systematic review identified studies describing models of perinatal health care for imprisoned women which report maternal and child health and care outcomes.

methodsWe systematically searched for literature published between 1980 and April 2014. Studies were eligible if they included a group of imprisoned pregnant women, a description of perinatal health care and any maternal or infant health or care outcomes. Two authors independently extracted data. We described relevant outcomes in prisons (including jails) under models of care we termed PRISON, PRISON+ and PRISON++, depending on the care provided. Where outcomes were available on a comparison group of women, we calculated odds ratios with 95 % confidence intervals.

resultsEighteen studies were reported, comprising 2001 imprisoned pregnant women. Fifteen were in the US, two in the UK and one in Germany. Nine contained a comparison group of women comprising 849 pregnant women. Study quality was variable and outcome reporting was inconsistent. There was some evidence that women in prisons receiving enhanced prison care, PRISON+, were less likely to have inadequate prenatal care (15.4 % vs 30.7 %, p < 0 · 001), preterm delivery (6.4 % vs 19.0 %, p = 0 · 001) or caesarean delivery (12.9 % vs 26.5 %, p = 0 · 005) compared to women in prisons receiving usual care (PRISON). Women participating in two PRISON++ interventions, that is, interventions which included not only enhanced care in prisons but also coordination of community care on release, demonstrated reductions in long term recidivism rates (summary OR 0 · 37, 95 % CI 0 · 19-0 · 70) compared to pregnant women in the same prisons who did not participate in the intervention.

conclusionsEnhanced perinatal care can improve both short and long-term outcomes but there is a lack of data. Properly designed programmes with rigorous evaluation are needed to address the needs of this vulnerable population. The cost to mothers, children and to society of failing to address these important public health issues are likely to be substantial.

trial registrationPROSPERO registration: CRD42012002384 .

Indexed as

Antenatal carePerinatal carePostnatal carePregnancy outcomesPregnant womenPrisonPrisoner

Identifiers

PMID27680206
PMCPMC5041517
OpenAlexW2526289597

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.