METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science and EBSCOHost was systematically searched for empirical studies between 2000 and 2023 that discussed on factors that influenced family planning usage among women with diabetes. This systematic literature review was conducted in accordance to Joanna Briggs Institute's approach for conducting systematic review of associations. Factors were categorised to either individual and non-individual factors. Narrative synthesis approach was adopted that appropriately accommodates the heterogeneity of the reviewed studies.
RESULTS: A total of 29 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies included in this review mostly reported individual-level factors that influence family planning practice among women with diabetes mellitus which were mainly the presence of diseases and other sociodemographic characteristics. Only six studies reported factors beyond individual variables which include geographic region, access to care, opinion of significant others, healthcare providers' perception, role of doctors and types of service providers.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides evidences that highlighted the gap in knowledge on variables that were beyond individual-level factors which influence family planning practice among women with diabetes mellitus. Further studies that explored structural and systemic factors may benefit future program planning to identify and target modifiable factors.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of systematic preconception genetic risk assessment to improve reproductive outcomes in women and their partners who are identified as carriers of thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease in healthcare settings when compared to usual care.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Trials Registers. In addition, we searched for all relevant trials from 1970 (or the date at which the database was first available if after 1970) to date using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO), clinical trial databases (National Institutes of Health, Clinical Trials Search portal of the World Health Organization, metaRegister of controlled clinical trials), and hand searching of key journals and conference abstract books from 1998 to date (European Journal of Human Genetics, Genetics in Medicine, Journal of Community Genetics). We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and guidelines and also contacted subject experts in the field to request any unpublished or other published trials.Date of latest search of the registers: 25 June 2015.Date of latest search of all other sources: 10 December 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised or quasi-randomised control trials (published or unpublished) comparing reproductive outcomes of systematic preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease when compared to usual care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified 19 papers, describing 13 unique trials which were potentially eligible for inclusion in the review. However, after assessment, no randomised controlled trials of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease were found.
MAIN RESULTS: No randomised controlled trials of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease were found.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As no randomised controlled trials of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis, or Tay-Sachs disease were found for inclusion in this review, the research evidence for current policy recommendations is limited to non-randomised studies.Information from well-designed, adequately powered, randomised trials is desirable in order to make more robust recommendations for practice. However, such trials must also consider the legal, ethical, and cultural barriers to implementation of preconception genetic risk assessment.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of systematic preconception genetic risk assessment to improve reproductive outcomes in women and their partners who are identified as carriers of thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease in healthcare settings when compared to usual care.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Trials Registers. In addition, we searched for all relevant trials from 1970 (or the date at which the database was first available if after 1970) to date using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO), clinical trial databases (National Institutes of Health, Clinical Trials Search portal of the World Health Organization, metaRegister of controlled clinical trials), and hand searching of key journals and conference abstract books from 1998 to date (European Journal of Human Genetics, Genetics in Medicine, Journal of Community Genetics). We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and guidelines and also contacted subject experts in the field to request any unpublished or other published trials.Date of latest search of the registers: 20 June 2017.Date of latest search of all other sources: 16 November 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (published or unpublished) comparing reproductive outcomes of systematic preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease when compared to usual care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified 25 papers, describing 16 unique trials which were potentially eligible for inclusion in the review. However, after assessment, no randomised controlled trials of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease were found.
MAIN RESULTS: No randomised controlled trials of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease were included. One ongoing trial has been identified which may potentially eligible for inclusion once completed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As no randomised controlled trials of preconception genetic risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis, or Tay-Sachs disease were found for inclusion in this review, the research evidence for current policy recommendations is limited to non-randomised studies.Information from well-designed, adequately powered, randomised trials is desirable in order to make more robust recommendations for practice. However, such trials must also consider the legal, ethical, and cultural barriers to implementation of preconception genetic risk assessment.
DESIGN: A quasi-experimental study comparing 2 groups: (1) integrated maternal health care (MHC) program (with preconception care) and (2) standard MHC program (without preconception care).
SETTING: Maternal health-care clinics in Alvand and Qazvin cities in Qazvin Province, Iran.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 152 and 247 Iranian women aged 16 to 35 years were enrolled in the integrated MHC and standard MHC program, respectively.
MEASURES: The birth outcomes measured included low birth weight, preterm birth, maternal and neonatal complications, and mode of delivery (normal vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery).
ANALYSIS: Multiple logistic regression was performed to determine the impact of preconception care and risk of adverse birth outcomes with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) as effect sizes.
RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven women in integrated MHC and 218 women in standard MHC completed this study. Preconception care was associated with reduced risk of preterm birth (OR = 0.298; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.120-0.743; P = .009), low birth weight (OR = 0.406; 95% CI = 0.169-0.971; P = .043), maternal complication (OR = 0.399; 95% CI = 0.241-0.663; P < .001), and neonatal complications (OR = 0.460; 95% CI = 0.275-0.771; P = .003).
CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study revealed advantages of preconception care with reduced adverse birth outcomes.