ArticlePloS one2024
Preconception health in adolescence and adulthood across generations in the UK: Findings from three British birth cohort studies.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What do we mean by preconception health and preconception care in research and policy? A systematic review.Human reproduction update · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- What Does 'Preconception Health' Mean to People? A Public Consultation on Awareness and Use of Language.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
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
Optimising preconception health in women and men holds significant potential for improving pregnancy and offspring health outcomes. To create a picture of the state of preconception health in the UK, this study aimed to describe the prevalence of and changes in preconception health indicators reported in three British birth cohort studies: the 1970 British Birth Cohort Study (BCS70; born in 1970; N = 17,198), Next Steps (1989-1990; N = 15,770), and Millennium Cohort Study (MCS; 2000-2002; N = 19,517). The analysis focused on data obtained during participants' adolescence (16-17 years) and subsequent follow-ups at 25-26 years for BCS70 and Next Steps. Self-reported preconception indicators were defined in line with a previously published review and reported as proportions. Across cohorts, data were available for 14 preconception indicators across four domains: health behaviours and weight, reproductive health and family planning, physical health conditions, and wider determinants of health. However, data for these indicators were not consistently available for all cohort members. Findings suggested persistent suboptimal health behaviours in both genders and across generations, including low intakes of fruit. While alcohol, tobacco, and soft drink intake decreased across generations, obesity prevalence surged. This study underscores the need for public health interventions targeting the root causes of adverse health behaviours towards improvement of fruit consumption, further reduction in alcohol, tobacco, and soft drink consumption, and addressing the escalating obesity rates among individuals of reproductive age. Ongoing monitoring is needed to continue tracking these existing indicators over time, while improved data quality and availability of a wider range of preconception indicators are crucial to comprehensively understanding the complexities of preconception health, enabling the development of more targeted and effective interventions.
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.