SynthesisHealth services research2023
Preconception, Interconception, and reproductive health screening tools: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Preexisting Diabetes and Pregnancy: An Endocrine Society and European Society of Endocrinology Joint Clinical Practice Guideline.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Guideline
- Preconception, Interconception, and reproductive health screening tools: A systematic review.Health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Organisation, Financing, and Implementation of Preconception Care in Primary Care: Implications for Women's Health and Well-Being.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Co-Creating an Interconception Infographic for Women From Priority Populations for Inclusion in the Baby Bundle at a Victorian Hospital: A Feasibility and Acceptability Pilot Study.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and needs concerning fertility and preconceptional health in Germany-insights from a pilot survey.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2026Article
- Improving interconception care: a qualitative study in United States primary care.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Psychometric evaluation of the desire to avoid pregnancy scale in India.Contraception · 2025Article
- Looking Back, Visioning Forward: Preconception Health in the US 2005 to 2023.Maternal and child health journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of a person-centered pregnancy prevention question and One Key Question to assess postpartum contraceptive needs.Contraception · 2024Article
- Prenatal Care Initiation and Exposure to Teratogenic Medications.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Infertility Prevention and Health Promotion: The Role of Nurses in Public Health Initiatives.Galen medical journal · 2024Review
- Barriers to Interconception Care Delivery in Primary Care: Clinician, Staff, and Patient Perspectives.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Pregnant for Nine Months, Postpartum for Life: Long-term Implications of Pregnancy Related Conditions.Missouri medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo identify and describe the standardized interconception and preconception screening tools for reproductive health needs that are applicable in general outpatient clinical practice. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY
settingThis systematic review identifies research on pregnancy intention screening and counseling tools, and standardized approaches to preconception and interconception care. We focus on tools designed for clinical settings, but also include research tools with potential for clinical implementation. These tools may include a component of contraceptive counseling, but those focusing solely on contraceptive counseling were excluded. Data were collected from studies done in the United States between January 2000 and March 2022. STUDY
designWe performed a systematic literature search to generate a list of unique tools, assessed the quality of evidence supporting each tool, and described the peer-reviewed clinical applications of each. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to appraise the quality of individual studies. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases for standardized preconception and interconception health screening tools published in English from January 2000 through March 2022. We used keywords "preconception care," "interconception care," "family planning," "contraception," "reproductive health services," and "counseling." Utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines, we screened titles and abstracts to identify studies for full text review. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe search resulted in 15,399 studies. After removing 4172 duplicates, we screened 11,227 titles/abstracts and advanced 207 for full-text review. From these, we identified 53 eligible studies representing 22 tools/standardized approaches, of which 10 had evidence from randomized clinical trials. These ranged widely in design, setting, and population of study.
conclusionsClinicians have a choice of tools when implementing standard reproductive screening services. A growing body of research can inform the selection of an appropriate tool, and more study is needed to establish effects on long-term patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.