ArticleBMC public health2024
Exploring online reproductive health promotion in Canada: a focus on behavioral and environmental influences from a sex and gender perspective.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReproductive health promotion can enable early mitigation of behavioral and environmental risk factors associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, while optimizing health of women + (all genders that can gestate a fetus) and babies. Although the biological and social influences of partners on pregnancy are well established, it is unknown whether online Canadian government reproductive health promotion also targets men and partners throughout the reproductive lifespan.
methodsReproductive health promotion, designed for the general public, was assessed in a multi-jurisdictional sample of Canadian government (federal, provincial/territorial, and municipal) and select non-governmental organization (NGO) websites. For each website, information related to environmental and behavioral influences on reproductive health (preconception, pregnancy, postpartum) was evaluated based on comprehensiveness, audience-specificity, and scientific quality.
resultsGovernment and NGO websites provided sparse reproductive health promotion for partners which was generally limited to preconception behavior topics with little coverage of environmental hazard topics. For women + , environmental and behavioral influences on reproductive health were well promoted for pregnancy, with content gaps for preconception and postpartum stages.
conclusionAlthough it is well established that partners influence pregnancy outcomes and fetal/infant health, Canadian government website promotion of partner-specific environmental and behavioral risks was limited. Most websites across jurisdictions promoted behavioral influences on pregnancy, however gaps were apparent in the provision of health information related to environmental hazards. As all reproductive stages, including preconception and postpartum, may be susceptible to environmental and behavioral influences, online health promotion should use a sex- and gender-lens to address biological contributions to embryo, fetal and infant development, as well as contributions of partners to the physical and social environments of the home.
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.