Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36372806›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2023

Shackling and pregnancy care policies in US prisons and jails.

Camille Kramer, Karenna Thomas, Ankita Patil, Crystal M Hayes, Carolyn B Sufrin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Carceral Health Care.The New England journal of medicine · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Hospital Restrictions Experienced by Women who Give Birth While Incarcerated.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

5 authors.

Camille KramerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 4940 Eastern Ave., A101, 21224, Baltimore, MD, USA. ckramer@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7033-3439
Karenna ThomasSchool of Public Health, Yale University, 60 College St, 06510, New Haven, CT, USA.
Ankita PatilDepartment of Psychology, The College of New Jersey, 2000 Pennington Rd. Ewing Township, 08618, Ewing, NJ, USA.
Crystal M HayesCenter of Excellence, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Carolyn B SufrinDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 4940 Eastern Ave., A101, 21224, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

The Johns Hopkins Clinical Research Scholars in Women's Health (BIRCWH)K12HD085845 · NICHD · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2015 to 2023
$4.5M
Treatment for Incarcerated Pregnant Women with Opioid Use Disorder: Implementaton Research on Medication Assisted Treatment in JailsK23DA045934 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SUFRIN, CAROLYN · 2018 to 2021
$883k
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD085845NIDA NIH HHS K23 DA045934NIDA NIH HHS NIDA 5K23DA045934
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe number of incarcerated women in the United States has risen exponentially. Many are of childbearing age with 3-4% being pregnant at intake. Despite the need for comprehensive pregnancy-related health care in prisons and jails, there is no oversight that requires adherence to the established standards. The objective of this study was to assess prison and jail pregnancy policies and practices with an emphasis on restraint use and compliance with anti-shackling legislation.

methodsWe conducted a survey of 22 state prisons and six jails, including the five largest jails, from 2016-2017 regarding pregnancy policies and practices including restraint use, prenatal care, delivery and birth, and other pregnancy accommodations. We compared reported restraint policies to state legislation at the time of the survey.

resultsData indicate that pregnancy policies and services in prisons and jails vary and compliance inconsistencies with anti-shackling legislation exist. A third of the prisons and half of the jails did not have accredited health care services. All study facilities provided prenatal vitamins and most provided supplemental snacks. Most facilities stationed an officer inside the hospital room during labor and delivery, but nearly one-third of facilities did not require a female-identifying officer. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Limited oversight and standardization of carceral health care and accommodations for pregnant people lead to variability in prisons and jails. Prisons and jails should adopt and implement standards of care guidelines to ensure the safety and well-being of pregnant people who have unique healthcare needs. Incarcerated pregnant people should be viewed as expectant parents in need of comprehensive health care, rather than as criminals who forfeited their right to a safe, respectful, and humane childbirth.

Indexed as

Prenatal CarePrisonersPrisonsFemaleHumansJailsPolicyPregnancyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID36372806
PMCPMC9660187

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.