Cited by 208Maternal and Neonatal HealthcareReproductive Health and ContraceptionClinical practice guidelines implementation

The clinical content of preconception care: an overview and preparation of this supplement

Open access
Jack, Brian W., Atrash, Hani, Coonrod, Dean V., Moos, Merry-K., O'Donnell, Julie, Johnson, Kay·2008·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

In June 2005, the Select Panel on Preconception Care established implementation workgroups in 5 areas (clinical, public health, consumer, policy and finance, and research and surveillance) to develop strategies for the implementation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations on preconception health and healthcare. In June 2006, members of the clinical workgroup asked the following questions: what are the clinical components of preconception care? What is the evidence for inclusion of each component in clinical activities? What health promotion package should be delivered as part of preconception care? Over the next 2 years, the 29 members of the clinical workgroup and > 30 expert consultants reviewed in depth > 80 topics that make up the content of the articles that are contained in this supplement. Topics were selected on the basis of the effect of preconception care on the health of the mother and/or infant, prevalence, and detectability. For each topic, the workgroup assigned a score for the strength of the evidence that supported its inclusion in preconception care and assigned a strength of the recommendation. This article summarizes the methods that were used to select and review each topic and provides a summary table of the recommendations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.07.067

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In 2008, the Panel's clinical workgroup published articles defining evidence-based best practices for preconception care.

    “Then in 2008, the Panel’s clinical workgroup published a series of articles that defines the evidence-based best practices in PCC.12”
  • The Gabby system's online preconception risk assessment was built from risk assessment tools used in earlier studies and updated according to published CDC clinical work group guidance.

    “The Gabby system’s online preconception risk assessment is based on risk assessment tools used in prior studies20 and updated based on the published work of the CDC clinical work group.12”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jack, B. W., Atrash, H., Coonrod, D. V., Moos, M.-K., O'Donnell, J., & Johnson, K.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Maricopa Medical Center (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Dartmouth College (US)
Corresponding author
Jack, Brian W.
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-12
Volume
199
Issue
6
Pages
S266-S279
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1976323966
Cited by
205
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
16.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
preconception care, preconception health, health promotion, maternal health, infant health, evidence-based recommendations, CDC guidelines, implementation strategies
MeSH terms
Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Preconception Care, Risk Assessment

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