MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889923087 · doi:10.26262/heal.auth.ir.362767

Preconception Care: A Comparative Review of Major Guidelines

2025· article· en· W6889923087 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAristotle University of Thessaloniki · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthAgency (philosophy)PregnancyPrenatal careHealth careMEDLINEFamily planningRisk assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Preconception care represents a crucial aspect of healthy pregnancy as it aims to optimize the health status of women and men before conception by mitigating the modifiable individual and environmental risk factors and providing education, counseling and timely interventions. Objective: The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published influential guidelines on the pre-pregnancy counseling and management of chronic medical conditions. Evidence Acquisition: A descriptive review of guidelines from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) on preconception care was carried out. Results: There is a consensus among the reviewed guidelines that a detailed personal and family history along with risk factors assessment and counseling against smoking, alcohol and substance abuse are the main areas to focus when providing preconception care. In addition, the assessment of immunization status, the screening for intimate partner violence and sexual coercion as well as the screening for HPV and cervical cancer are unanimously recommended. All medical societies also agree that counseling on diet, BMI and physical activity should be routinely offered along with a review of supplements and advice on folic acid supplementation. Furthermore, the need of medication review for potential teratogenic effects and the importance of assessing for environmental and occupational exposure to teratogens are underlined by all guidelines. Moreover, ACOG and PHAC recommend a discussion about contraception, support an optimal interpregnancy interval of at least 18 months and underline that screening for STIs should be offered only in case of existing risk factors. ACOG and RANZCOG also suggest that patients should be offered guidance on proper food handling and traveling restrictions to prevent certain infectious diseases. Finally, ACOG and PHAC provide guidance on the preconception management of chronic medical conditions, whereas RANZCOG although mentioning that all pre-existing medical conditions should be optimized before achieving pregnancy, it provides no further guidance. Conclusion: Preparing for a healthy pregnancy not only drives favorable perinatal outcomes, but is also associated with long-lasting benefits for the offspring. Health care professionals are ideally positioned to offer clear, accurate and timely counseling to the parents-to-be, screen for and act upon any potential impediments to a successful outcome, support the decision-making process and offer referral to relevant services when required. Therefore, the development of consistent international guidelines on preconception care to guide clinical practice seems of insurmountable importance.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.303 · 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