The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Catalyzing a Reproductive Health and Social Justice Movement
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: The maternal and child health (MCH) community, partnering with women and their families, has the potential to play a critical role in advancing a new multi-sector social movement focused on creating a women's reproductive and economic justice agenda. Since the turn of the twenty-first century, the MCH field has been planting seeds for change. The time has come for this work to bear fruit as many states are facing stagnant or slow progress in reducing infant mortality, increasing maternal death rates, and growing health inequities. METHODS: This paper synthesizes three current, interrelated approaches to addressing MCH challenges-life course theory, preconception health, and social justice/reproductive equity. CONCLUSION: Based on these core constructs, the authors offer four directions for advancing efforts to improve MCH outcomes. The first is to ensure access to quality health care for all. The second is to facilitate change through critical conversations about challenging issues such as poverty, racism, sexism, and immigration; the relevance of evidence-based practice in disenfranchised communities; and how we might be perpetuating inequities in our institutions. The third is to develop collaborative spaces in which leaders across diverse sectors can see their roles in creating equitable neighborhood conditions that ensure optimal reproductive choices and outcomes for women and their families. Last, the authors suggest that leaders engage the MCH workforce and its consumers in dialogue and action about local and national policies that address the social determinants of health and how these policies influence reproductive and early childhood outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
This supports prior calls for the conceptualisation of preconception care as being beneficial for women's health across the lifecourse, rather than solely as a preparation for pregnancy.
“This supports prior calls for the conceptualisation of preconception care as being beneficial for women's health across the lifecourse, rather than solely as a preparation for pregnancy [46, 47].”
From Preconception Perceptions, Knowledge and Behaviours of Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Qualitative Study (2026) · cites this paper as [46]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 10 · Cited by 69
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Bylander, J. (2014). The best chance at life. Health Affairs (Millwood), 33, 2188–2189. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1218 . · DOI
- Gavin, L., Moskosky, S., Carter, L., Curtis, K., Glass, E., Godfrey, E., et al. (2014). Providing quality family planning services: Recommendations of CDC and the U.S. Office of Population Affairs. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 63(RR04), 1–29.
- Hogan, V. K., Rowley, D., Bennett, T., & Taylor, K. D. (2012). Life course, social determinants, and health inequities: Toward a national plan for achieving health equity for African American infants—A concept paper. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 16, 1143–1150. doi: 10.1007/s10995-011-0847-0 . · DOI
- Johnson, K., Posner, S. F., Biermann, J., Cordero, J., Atrash, H. K., Parker, C. S., et al. (2006). Recommendations to improve preconception health and health care—United States. A report of the CDC/ATSDR Preconception Care Workgroup and the Select Panel on Preconception Care. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 55(RR-6), 1–23.
- Lu, M. C., & Halfon, N. (2003). Racial and ethnic disparities in birth outcomes: A life course perspective. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 7, 13–30. doi: 10.1023/A:1022537516969 . · DOI · Paper page
- Lu, M. C., Kotelchuck, M., Hogan, V., Jones, L., Wright, K., & Halfon, N. (2010). Closing the Black–White gap in birth outcomes: A life-course approach. Ethnicity and Disease, 20(Suppl 2), S2-62–S2-76.
- Petersen, D. J. (2015). Leading maternal and child health (MCH): Past, present and future. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 19, 244–246. doi: 10.1007/s10995-014-1565-1 . · DOI
- Rudolph, L., Caplan, J., Ben-Moshe, K., & Dillon, L. (2013). Health in all policies: A guide for state and local governments. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association and Public Health Institute.
- Waggoner, M. R. (2013). Motherhood preconceived: The emergence of the Preconception Health and Health Care Initiative. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 38, 345–371. doi: 10.1215/03616878-1966333 . · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Verbiest, S., Malin, C. K., Drummonds, M., & Kotelchuck, M.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Alameda County Public Health Department (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Verbiest, Sarah
- Venue
- Maternal and Child Health Journal
- Published
- 2016-01-06
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 741-748
- ISSN
- 1092-7875 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-6628
- PMC
- PMC4792350
- OpenAlex
- W2230914808
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 8.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Maternal and Child Health Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
- Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- UNC Libraries
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
- Keywords
- reproductive justice, social justice, maternal and child health, social movements, life course perspective, preconception health, health disparities, social determinants of health, infant mortality, maternal mortality, health care access, racism, sexism, immigration, poverty, early childhood outcomes, intersectoral collaboration, health policy
- MeSH terms
- Maternal-Child Health Services, Child, Preschool, Cooperative Behavior, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Humans, Infant, Pregnancy, Public Health, Social Justice, Reproductive Health
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review