↓ Skip to main content

Directed preconception health programs and interventions for improving pregnancy outcomes for women who are overweight or obese

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
221 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Directed preconception health programs and interventions for improving pregnancy outcomes for women who are overweight or obese
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010932.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolle Opray, Rosalie M Grivell, Andrea R Deussen, Jodie M Dodd

Abstract

Overweight and obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m(2) and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2,) respectively are increasingly common among women of reproductive age. Overweight and obesity are known to be associated with many adverse health conditions in the preconception period, during pregnancy and during the labour and postpartum period. There are no current guidelines to suggest which preconception health programs and interventions are of benefit to these women and their infants. It is important to evaluate the available evidence to establish which preconception interventions are of value to this population of women. To evaluate the effectiveness of preconception health programs and interventions for improving pregnancy outcomes in overweight and obese women. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 December 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomised controlled trials (including those using a cluster-randomised design), comparing health programs and interventions with routine care in women of reproductive age and a BMI greater then or equal to 25 kg/m(2). Studies published in abstract form only, were not eligible for inclusion. Quasi-randomised trials or randomised trials using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion in this review. The intervention in such studies would involve an assessment of preconception health and lead to an individualised preconception program addressing any areas of concern for that particular woman.Preconception interventions could involve any or all of: provision of specific information, screening for and treating obesity-related health problems, customised or general dietary and exercise advice, medical or surgical interventions. Medical interventions may include treatment of pre-existing hypertension, impaired glucose tolerance or sleep apnoea. Surgical interventions may include interventions such as bariatric surgery. The comparator was prespecified to be standard preconception advice or no advice/interventions. We identified no studies that met the inclusion criteria for this review. The search identified one study (published in four trial reports) which was independently assessed by two review authors and subsequently excluded. There are no included trials. We found no randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of preconception health programs and interventions in overweight and obese women with the aim of improving pregnancy outcomes. Until the effectiveness of preconception health programs and interventions can be established, no practice recommendations can be made. Further research is required in this area.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 <1%
Unknown 220 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 23%
Student > Bachelor 37 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 14%
Researcher 18 8%
Student > Postgraduate 14 6%
Other 34 15%
Unknown 36 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 22%
Social Sciences 14 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Sports and Recreations 7 3%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 46 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 January 2019.
All research outputs
#4,031,570
of 14,239,448 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,922
of 10,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,416
of 235,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#198
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,239,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,912 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 235,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.