SEARCHSYSTEMATIC_REVIEWobstetrics and gynecology, family medicine

systematic_review·obstetrics and gynecology, family medicine, public health, systematic review, clinical trial·PMC10012234

Preconception, Interconception, and reproductive health screening tools: A systematic review

Health Services Research · 7 authors, 4 centres

AI SUMMARY

FIDELITY 100%

This summary was generated by AI from a single paper. It has not been reviewed by a clinician and is not clinical advice. Verify against the source before acting on it.

AGENT 01 · STRUCTURED SUMMARY

TRACE TO SOURCE

“

TL;DR

This systematic review identified 22 standardized tools for preconception, interconception, and pregnancy intention screening in U.S. clinical settings, with 10 tools supported by randomized clinical trial evidence.

Full summary

596 CHARS

The authors conducted a systematic literature search, appraised study quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and described the clinical applications of each tool. Among the 53 eligible studies representing 22 tools, 10 had evidence from randomized clinical trials. For many other approaches, implementing a standardized tool leads to higher rates of screening and counseling, but these have yet to demonstrate changes in patient behavior or clinical outcomes. Limitations include a focus on English-language studies from the U.S. and the exclusion of studies solely on contraceptive use.

STUDY TYPE

systematic_review

SPECIALTY

obstetrics and gynecology

SUMMARISED BY

AI pipeline

FIDELITY CHECK

100% · A

ORIGINAL PAPER

PMC10012234

Preconception, Interconception, and reproductive health screening tools: A systematic review

Health Services Research

READ THE FULL PAPER

ABSTRACT

Abstract Objective To identify and describe the standardized interconception and preconception screening tools for reproductive health needs that are applicable in general outpatient clinical practice. Data Sources and Study Setting This systematic review identifies research on pregnancy intention screening and counseling tools, and standardized approaches to preconception and interconception care. We focus on tools designed for clinical settings, but also include research tools with potential for clinical implementation. These tools may include a component of contraceptive counseling, but those focusing solely on contraceptive counseling were excluded. Data were collected from studies done in the United States between January 2000 and March 2022. Study Design We performed a systematic literature search to generate a list of unique tools, assessed the quality of evidence supporting each tool, and described the peer‐reviewed clinical applications of each. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to appraise the quality of individual studies. Data Collection/Extraction Methods We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases for standardized preconception and interconception health screening tools published in English from January 2000 through March 2022. We used keywords “preconception care,” “interconception care,” “family planning,” “contraception,” “reproductive health services,” and “counseling.” Utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines, we screened titles and abstracts to identify studies for full text review. Principal Findings The search resulted in 15,399 studies. After removing 4172 duplicates, we screened 11,227 titles/abstracts and advanced 207 for full‐text review. From these, we identified 53 eligible studies representing 22 tools/standardized approaches, of which 10 had evidence from randomized clinical trials. These ranged widely in design, setting, and population of study. Conclusions Clinicians have a choice of tools when implementing standard reproductive screening services. A growing body of research can inform the selection of an appropriate tool, and more study is needed to establish effects on long‐term patient outcomes. Keywords: interconception care, preconception care, pregnancy intention screening, primary care, reproductive counseling, reproductive life plan, systematic review

CITATION EXPORT

Megan Ren, Hannah Shireman, Emily White VanGompel et al.. Preconception, Interconception, and reproductive health screening tools: A systematic review. Health Services Research. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.14123

AUTHORS

7 · 4 CENTRES

Megan Ren, Hannah Shireman, Emily White VanGompel, Jennifer K Bello, Francesca Carlock, Ashley McHugh, Debra Stulberg

1 Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
2 Department of Family Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
3 Northshore University Healthsystem, Evanston, Illinois, USA
4 Department of Family and Community Medicine, Saint Louis University, St Louis, Missouri, USA