MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310639011 · doi:10.1111/jocn.16584

Predictors of preconception health knowledge among Canadian women: A nationwide cross‐sectional study

2022· article· en· W4310639011 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cindy‐Lee Dennis, Alessandra Prioreschi, Catherine S. Birken, Sarah Brennenstuhl, Hilary K. Brown, Rhonda C. Bell, Flavia Marini, Stephanie V. Wrottesley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaThe Scarborough HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCross-sectional studyMedicineFamily medicineEnvironmental healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Optimising preconception health-that is the health of women and men prior to a potential pregnancy-is increasingly recognised as fundamental to improving maternal and infant health outcomes. To date, limited research has been conducted examining preconception knowledge and studies focusing on preconception health behaviours have targeted certain behaviours, while overlooking others, with limited attention given to the interconception period and differences between multiparous and primiparous/nulliparous women. AIMS: To determine predictors of preconception health knowledge among Canadian women and to examine whether parity modified the effect of predictors on preconception knowledge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study reported according to STROBE was undertaken from May to June 2019 in Canada with 928 women. An online questionnaire was used including the Preconception Health Knowledge Questionnaire, demographic characteristics, current health status, previous pregnancy outcomes and use of preconception care services. Ordinary least squares regression was used to model knowledge scores. Predictors were entered using theoretically driven hierarchical entry. RESULTS: Mean age of women was 34 years and one in five were immigrants. In the final model, household income (b = .17, SE = .07; p = .009), being born outside Canada (b = -.75, SE = .25; p = .003), miscarriage/stillbirth history (b = .47, SE = .21; p = .027) and previous use of preconception care (b = .97, SE = .20, p ⟩ .001) were predictive of preconception health knowledge. Effect modification by parity was not statistically significant in the final model (f = 1.22, p = .19). DISCUSSION: Women at higher risk of poor preconception knowledge, and who therefore stand to gain from preconception knowledge interventions may include those who (1) are socially and economically disadvantaged; (2) have not engaged in preconception care previously and (3) were not born in Canada. Ensuring national promotion of and access to preconception care is an important strategy to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes and optimise maternal and infant health. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the need for national promotion of and access to preconception health care for all pregnancy-planning families in order to improve perinatal outcomes. RELEVANCE FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: When evaluating preconception health efforts, preconception health knowledge must be considered within the context of social determinants of health and individuals' abilities to act on their knowledge.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.396 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207