ライフサイエンスコーパス: prenatal care

1 perinatal deaths (n = 189) caused by lack of prenatal care.

2 nital tract colonization with E. coli during prenatal care.

3 hest, thereby changing family counseling and prenatal care.

4 ps in patients' satisfaction with quality of prenatal care.

5 ects and common chromosomal anomalies during prenatal care.

6 group prenatal care compared with individual prenatal care.

7 es have been largely absent from redesigning prenatal care.

8 or self-reported cannabis use at entrance to prenatal care.

9 renatal care and 1617 (13.4%) had inadequate prenatal care.

10 tal care, and 4703 (38.8%) had adequate plus prenatal care.

11 or pregnancy, are not routinely monitored in prenatal care.

12 percentage points compared with intermediate prenatal care.

13 at policymakers prioritize this issue during prenatal care.

14 e-gene conditions is the current standard of prenatal care.

15 egnancy complications, prenatal smoking, and prenatal care.

16 ations in receiving hybrid vs only in-person prenatal care.

17 years, and 2540 (27.4%) had publicly funded prenatal care.

18 ducted during early pregnancy at entrance to prenatal care.

19 ancing" impeded access to social support and prenatal care.

20 ancy program is a widely recognized model of prenatal care.

21 onal guidance to reduce inequity and enhance prenatal care.

22 tly improved receipt of guideline-concordant prenatal care.

23 the importance of nutritional supplements in prenatal care.

24 te plus (110% or more of recommended visits) prenatal care.

25 e hybrid (ie, both telehealth and in-person) prenatal care.

26 epression, anxiety) and perceived quality of prenatal care.

27 age of at least 24 weeks, and received local prenatal care.

28 , mother's age, race, education, parity, and prenatal care.

29 arital status, infant sex, and initiation of prenatal care.

30 may help shape future guidelines on maternal prenatal care.

31 asure of antioxidant status, at the entry to prenatal care.

32 al age less than 32 weeks, and having had no prenatal care.

33 nformation on timing or quality of follow-up prenatal care.

34 ers (23.5%) were known to have received some prenatal care.

35 3946) reported not being permitted to obtain prenatal care.

36 37 respondents, 519 (11%) reported receiving prenatal care.

37 omen who received only third-trimester or no prenatal care.

38 risk substance use among 186 women receiving prenatal care.

39 nd attended a public health clinic for their prenatal care.

40 pecially for women who may not have obtained prenatal care.

41 cs, that are not amenable to intervention by prenatal care.

42 periodic checkups (9%; 95% CI, 6%-12%), and prenatal care (11%; 95% CI, 7%-15%).

43 . 34.5 pounds (15.7 kg)), and to have had no prenatal care (12% vs. 2% ) than mothers of nonasthmatic

44 For women with HIV, we assessed whether late prenatal care ( 14 weeks), starting ART in an earlier er

45 limited prenatal care (3.01 [1.38-6.56]), no prenatal care (16.08 [1.96-132.11]), substance use (3.42

46 after TennCare in the proportions with late prenatal care (16.2% in 1993 vs 15.8% in 1995), inadequa

47 ongenital syphilis outcomes included limited prenatal care (3.01 [1.38-6.56]), no prenatal care (16.0

48 , -1.3 to -0.3), and more prevalent adequate prenatal care (3.1%; 95% CI, 0.6-5.6), postpartum care i

49 .3 percentage points) and increased adequate prenatal care (4.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 11.

50 frequency was: 1304 (10.8%) had intermediate prenatal care, 4217 (34.8%) had adequate prenatal care,

51 21.4% [95% CI, 19.4%-23.4%]; P < .001), and prenatal care (50.2% vs 9.9%; difference, 40.3 [95% CI,

52 tay, 10 days (6-17 d) versus 6 days (4-9 d); prenatal care, 75% versus 99.4%; fetal-neonatal losses,

53 in Medicaid, P < .001), and initiated early prenatal care (79.7% in commercial vs 72.5% in Medicaid,

54 than those who were US born accessing timely prenatal care (95% CI, -2.31 to -0.75), and in the Hispa

55 xpansion states who would not receive timely prenatal care; 95% CI, -3.31 to -0.42).

56 he analysis to subjects with first-trimester prenatal care, a nonmissing date of the last menstrual p

57 Substance use correlated with prenatal care adequacy (P < .001).

58 The timing of HAART initiation and prenatal care, along with medication adherence during pr

59 eving centers to promote early initiation of prenatal care among medically vulnerable and underserved

60 rates that a mother's education and adequate prenatal care (ANC) visits have a significant impact on

61 natal care initiation was: 272 (2.3%) had no prenatal care and 1617 (13.4%) had inadequate prenatal c

62 irapine was demonstrated when women received prenatal care and antenatal ART, and elective cesarean s

63 ntrol group received free transportation for prenatal care and child developmental screening and refe

64 The authors studied women seeking prenatal care and delivering singletons in uncomplicated

65 bility models estimated associations between prenatal care and delivery hospital, controlling for dem

66 delivery, providing a complementary tool for prenatal care and delivery planning.

67 ndings underscore the importance of vigilant prenatal care and early detection of cardiac abnormaliti

68 e noted in patient overall satisfaction with prenatal care and feeling prepared for taking care of th

69 Medicaid coverage of prenatal care and Medicaid coverage of postpartum care.

70 ay result in the seeming incongruity of more prenatal care and more preterm births; however, these da

71 This study suggests that prenatal care and nutritional counseling could reduce as

72 s evaluated the relation between adequacy of prenatal care and risk of delivery of full term small-fo

73 differences design to compare the rollout of prenatal care and services in Oregon in 2013 with a comp

74 Late entry to prenatal care and starting ART in an earlier era were as

75 e relation between plasma leptin at entry to prenatal care and subsequent changes in weight from entr

76 (i.e., race/ethnicity, education, entry into prenatal care) and infant (i.e., birth weight, gestation

77 ate prenatal care, 4217 (34.8%) had adequate prenatal care, and 4703 (38.8%) had adequate plus prenat

78 ronic Health Evaluation II, education level, prenatal care, and admission to tertiary hospitals.

79 istory, perinatal complications, adequacy of prenatal care, and infant gender.

80 ow birth weight (less than 1500 g), adequate prenatal care, and postnatal care (3 weeks and 60 days).

81 n and postpartum periods, early and adequate prenatal care, and postpartum checkups and effective con

82 is, previous pregnancy with HIV, adequacy of prenatal care, and postpartum HIV care engagement (>/= 1

83 reversible contraception), satisfaction with prenatal care, and preparation for self and baby care af

84 ating later initiation), receipt of adequate prenatal care, and receipt of a postpartum health care v

85 ing in the first 3-6 months of life, optimum prenatal care, and timely immunisations against the comm

86 y homogenous population, virtually universal prenatal care, and uniform institutional conditions for

87 etrical and medical history, time of initial prenatal care, and year of pregnancy.

88 crease 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01), established prenatal care (aOR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.29-2.42), and medica

89 In this cohort study, only 46.0% of prenatal care app users who met the criteria for highest

90 tal cannabis use was assessed at entrance to prenatal care (approximately 8- to 10-weeks' gestation)

91 report and urine toxicology at entrance into prenatal care (approximately 8- to 10-weeks' gestation).

92 and a higher probability of first trimester prenatal care (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.21-1.27; P < .001) c

93 are may consider incorporating virtual group prenatal care as a prenatal care option for patients.

94 ortant to foetal growth and could be used in prenatal care as an additional strategy to screen women

95 f at least 25 years (relative risk, 6.8); no prenatal care as compared with early prenatal care (rela

96 removal of isolated cannabis use and limited prenatal care as UDS indications, coupled with clinical

97 nal heart, kidney, or liver disease entering prenatal care at 14 weeks' gestation or earlier and deli

98 ting policy only, or both policies initiated prenatal care at a later month of gestation (beta = 0.44

99 irths to 21 648 birthing people who received prenatal care at an academic medical center in the Midwe

100 20 African American adolescents who received prenatal care at an inner-city maternity clinic between

101 ohort study were obtained from women seeking prenatal care at any of the two tertiary, seven regional

102 from preconception to delivery who received prenatal care at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (

103 ween October 1992 and February 1995, entered prenatal care at Magee-Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh, Pe

104 e data beginning with interviews of women in prenatal care at midpregnancy to predict alcohol use and

105 ween 2016 and 2019, pregnant women receiving prenatal care at NYU Langone Health (New York, New York)

106 395 self-reported smokers who were receiving prenatal care at public clinics in three US states (Colo

107 e from Camden, NJ, was studied from entry to prenatal care (at 15.0 +/- 0.49 wk gestation).

108 d subsequent changes in weight from entry to prenatal care (at 17 wk gestation, baseline) until 6 mo

109 ntage of women who, if deterred from seeking prenatal care because of a mandatory HIV testing policy,

110 Complete agreement for month and trimester prenatal care began was 31.1% (n = 632) and 50.6% (n = 1

111 nsurance status, and maternal age) receiving prenatal care between August 17, 2020, and April 1, 2021

112 Disparities exist in access to timely prenatal care between immigrant women and US-born women.

113 living situation and IPV as part of standard prenatal care between January 1, 2019, and December 31,

114 lowed reaching individuals without access to prenatal care but was not representative of the US popul

115 is approach misses pregnancies that received prenatal care but whose outcomes were not recorded, pote

116 xpanded Medicaid in 2014, the rate of timely prenatal care by nativity in years after expansion was c

117 o 24 years) and target (more total patients, prenatal care by referral only, a larger proportion of p

118 io (controlling for mother's age, education, prenatal care, cigarette smoking status, and residential

119 PrOMIS cohort (N = 3308) was recruited from prenatal care clinics at the Instituto Nacional Materno

120 um among 1,006 women enrolled in Los Angeles prenatal care clinics between 1995 and 2001.

121 Women were enrolled at prenatal care clinics during their second trimester, at

122 ruited at 24-29 weeks of pregnancy from four prenatal care clinics in North Carolina from August 1995

123 design-informed interviews were conducted at prenatal care clinics with 19 low-income Black patients

124 pregnancy prevention programs, young adults, prenatal care clinics, and married women.

125 Although awareness was highest in private prenatal care clinics, compared with public outpatient c

126 Prenatal care commonly occurred after strict legal abort

127 roved postpartum outcomes of in-person group prenatal care compared with individual prenatal care.

128 n residents had nearly 2-fold odds of hybrid prenatal care compared with rural people (adjusted odds

129 per liter]) were randomly assigned to usual prenatal care (control group) or dietary intervention, s

130 Prenatal care coverage alone was not associated with a m

131 016 were examined for an association between prenatal care coverage for women whose births were cover

132 rence design to compare the rollout of first prenatal care coverage in 2013 and then postpartum servi

133 with multiple births who received intensive prenatal care (defined as a high number of visits, excee

134 d the health care workers who care for them, prenatal care delivery failed to meet many patients' nee

135 res and potential solutions for each area of prenatal care delivery.

136 of outcome in the first pregnancy, adequate prenatal care did not reduce the risk of full term SGA b

137 birth is not always unexpected, yet standard prenatal care does not offer anticipatory education to p

138 dio-only virtual visits were integrated into prenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic, as feasible

139 AI and ML methods were used the most include prenatal care (e.g. fetal anomalies, placental functioni

140 de a growing trend towards medicalisation of prenatal care, ensuring staff are trained to treat devel

141 s, including prepregnancy BMI, viral load at prenatal care entry, and gestational age at delivery wer

142 icity, education, parity, gestational age at prenatal care entry, and prepregnancy body mass index.

143 In 1989, the Expert Panel on the Content of Prenatal Care established guidelines on the timing and c

144 partum contraceptive use increased following prenatal care expansion (increase of 1.5 percentage poin

145 traditional risk factors such as smoking and prenatal care fail to account for it.

146 ernal risk factors should be incorporated in prenatal care for SSD-women to minimize avoidable advers

147 Coverage of prenatal care for women in Emergency Medicaid was associ

148 eton pregnancies, receiving universal-access prenatal care from obstetricians, family physicians, or

149 body mass index, age, ethnicity, parity, and prenatal care, gestational diabetes was associated with

150 ears, this screening test has revolutionized prenatal care globally and opened up new prospects for p

151 ded to evaluate outcomes of group multimodal prenatal care (GMPC), with groups delivered virtually in

152 Although all affirmed the 3 prenatal care goals, participants reported failures and

153 l appointments (SMAs) for diabetes and group prenatal care (GPC) for pregnant patients have emerged a

154 The impact of group-based prenatal care (GPNC) model in the US on the risk of gest

155 tion for themselves and their spouses, early prenatal care, gravida 2 or 3, and no previous fetal los

156 Advances in fetal imaging and access to prenatal care have improved the ability to anticipate an

157 study adds to the evidence base for enhanced prenatal care home visiting programs and informs state a

158 er tests compared with individual multimodal prenatal care (IMPC) delivered through a combination of

159 nization has emphasized the critical role of prenatal care in achieving the Millennium Development Go

160 However, the role of prenatal care in delivery location remains unclear.

161 s design to compare the staggered rollout of prenatal care in Oregon with South Carolina, a state tha

162 Free access to prenatal care in Switzerland reduced the risk of some ad

163 7.1%) and target (84.8%) for women receiving prenatal care in the first trimester (Maternal, Infant,

164 rserved populations are less likely to begin prenatal care in the first trimester.

165 h centers tracked whether patients initiated prenatal care in their first trimester of pregnancy.

166 fetuses has remained an ongoing challenge in prenatal care, in the absence of established prenatal bi

167 shed guidelines on the timing and content of prenatal care, including a schedule consisting of fewer

168 lacebo, returning every 4 weeks for standard prenatal care, including malaria screening, prophylaxis

169 Prenatal care incorporating audio-only prenatal care vis

170 Hybrid prenatal care increased from nearly none before March 20

171 In this cohort study, hybrid prenatal care increased substantially during the COVID-1

172 es traditionally used to examine adequacy of prenatal care indicate that prenatal care utilization re

173 is change was undetected by more traditional prenatal care indices.

174 Timely prenatal care was categorized as prenatal care initiated in the first trimester.

175 prenatal care initiation-none vs inadequate prenatal care (initiated after the fourth month or less

176 Month of gestation at prenatal care initiation (ie, months 1-10, with a higher

177 togenic exposure was compared with timing of prenatal care initiation and legal abortion cutoffs.

178 lence of prenatal exposure to teratogens and prenatal care initiation by gestational week.

179 h new legal abortion restrictions, timing of prenatal care initiation is critical to allow for discus

180 nancies (2.5% [2.4-2.5] of all pregnancies); prenatal care initiation occurred after 15 weeks for 181

181 Measurement of prenatal care initiation was adapted from the Children's

182 Prenatal care initiation was associated with a 10.5 (95%

183 In this cross-sectional study, delayed prenatal care initiation was associated with higher prob

184 Distribution for prenatal care initiation was: 272 (2.3%) had no prenatal

185 ographic, other substance use and disorders, prenatal care initiation, comorbidities, and clustering

186 tions occurred in early pregnancy and before prenatal care initiation, precluding prenatal risk-benef

187 iated with lower adjusted odds of late or no prenatal care initiation, sexually transmitted infection

188 Two binary exposure variables: (1) prenatal care initiation-none vs inadequate prenatal car

189 gnancy volumes, including delays in starting prenatal care, interruptions in reproductive endocrinolo

190 oup-based sessions or traditional individual prenatal care (IPNC).

191 The impact of maternal smoking and poor prenatal care is also reviewed in the form of a number o

192 Incorporating NBS education into prenatal care is broadly supported by lay and profession

193 Access to necessary prenatal care is not guaranteed through Medicaid for som

194 Early prenatal care is vital for improving maternal health out

195 pregnancy was unintended; and who initiated prenatal care late, responded late to the survey questio

196 on to extend emergency Medicaid coverage for prenatal care, many states have not expanded coverage.

197 Increased resources for prenatal care, maternal health, and postpartum care may

198 Inequalities in access to adequate prenatal care may contribute to poor outcomes associated

199 that a high leptin concentration at entry to prenatal care may predict an increased risk of overweigh

200 lyses documented higher perceived quality of prenatal care (MD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.01-0.31) and preparat

201 nt group differences in perceived quality of prenatal care (mean difference [MD], 0.01; 95% CI, -0.12

202 sample, 25.5 (5.8) years]; 124 166 in usual prenatal care [mean age (SD), 26.6 (5.5) years]).

203 articipants' experiences with the 3 goals of prenatal care: medical care, anticipatory guidance, and

204 These risks included missed prenatal care; musculoskeletal hazards, such as prolonge

205 Many had inadequate prenatal care (n = 61 [47%]) and/or had substance use hi

206 ment groups: treatment 1 (transportation for prenatal care [n = 166]), treatment 2 (transportation pl

207 phaly among infants born to women with early prenatal care (odds ratio (OR) = 4.54, 95% confidence in

208 stratified analysis to assess the effect of prenatal care on the risk of having an SGA baby in the s

209 corporating virtual group prenatal care as a prenatal care option for patients.

210 commended regimens did so because of limited prenatal care or by choice.

211 ma (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 9,7), lack of prenatal care (OR = 4.7), history of bronchiolitis (OR =

212 : 1.47; 95% CI: 1.42, 1.52), did not receive prenatal care (OR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.53, 1.60), or were ag

213 d hypertension among women who received less prenatal care (OR=4.2 for eclampsia and OR=3.1 for sever

214 they were less well educated, had inadequate prenatal care, or had longer hospital stays at delivery.

215 ernal age, maternal education, initiation of prenatal care, order of livebirth, and use of ultrasound

216 use, drug use, alcohol consumption, level of prenatal care, parity, genitourinary infections, and nut

217 Compared with usual prenatal care, participation in the Strong Beginnings pr

218 a population-based cohort study of high-risk prenatal care patients in Jefferson County, Alabama.

219 Mellitus Study, a prospective cohort of 1231 prenatal care patients.

220 this association is mediated by adequacy of prenatal care (PNC).

221 evidence of significant differences in early prenatal care, postpartum check-ups, or postpartum contr

222 s have attempted to implement the program in prenatal care practice; however, its effectiveness on ma

223 n important part of overall strengthening of prenatal-care programmes.

224 evaluations of state-based Medicaid enhanced prenatal care programs that provide home visiting to gui

225 To determine the receptivity of prenatal care providers and their patients to carrier te

226 ed by genetic counseling of carriers, to all prenatal care providers in Rochester, NY, for all their

227 Efforts should be made by prenatal care providers to provide Tdap vaccine to pregn

228 Of 124 prenatal care providers, only 37 elected to participate,

229 other prospective data were determined from prenatal care records and questionnaires for 10 314 wome

230 as used to identify promising strategies for prenatal care redesign.

231 pregnant women for HBV infection at routine prenatal care registration.

232 .8); no prenatal care as compared with early prenatal care (relative risk, 10.4); and less than 12 ye

233 by other factors (e.g., maternal birthplace, prenatal care, reproductive history, age, socioeconomic

234 vely) and had a lower likelihood of adequate prenatal care (risk ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.79-0.91], 0.9

235 Prenatal care screenings (eg, anemia screening: increase

236 Earlier prenatal care seemed "protective" for non-Hispanics (OR

237 Ensuring access to prenatal care services in the US is challenging, and imp

238 to 31 290 pregnant women through government prenatal care services that were strengthened by trainin

239 s and infant death in the setting of routine prenatal care services.

240 intercept survey of 411 pregnant women in 4 prenatal care settings was conducted during 15-28 Februa

241 nding Emergency Medicaid benefits to include prenatal care significantly improved receipt of guidelin

242 rnal age, education, parity, marital status, prenatal care, smoking, and previous preterm delivery.

243 mation was collected regarding demographics, prenatal care, substance use, and other social factors.

244 .12-1.24) were more likely to receive hybrid prenatal care than non-Hispanic White people.

245 l conditions as well as inadequate access to prenatal care; their risk of ED use in pregnancy is not

246 ings, making it a potent means of augmenting prenatal care through refined ultrasound image interpret

247 Treatment is still prenatal care, timely diagnosis, proper management, and

248 d may create the potential harms of avoiding prenatal care to avoid mandatory testing.

249 tus, infant sex, and timing of initiation of prenatal care to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of preterm

250 l outcomes for newborn infants starting from prenatal care to recovery and follow-up.

251 , location outside New England, provision of prenatal care to women living with HIV, and more uninsur

252 arallel-group Improving Mothers for a Better Prenatal Care Trial Barcelona (IMPACT BCN) randomized cl

253 e IMPACT BCN (Improving Mothers for a better PrenAtal Care Trial BarCeloNa) trial is to determine the

254 fant mortality rate for women with intensive prenatal care use declined between 1983 and 1996 and rem

255 ion was used to assess the risk of intensive prenatal care use in 1981 and 1995.

256 owed a steadily increasing trend toward more prenatal care use throughout the study period (R-GINDEX,

257 After adjustment for maternal hypertension, prenatal care use, and sociodemographic factors, the dis

258 nception uninsurance, and increased adequate prenatal care use.

259 these data suggest that women with intensive prenatal care utilization also have a lower infant morta

260 e type, education, maternal age, Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index, and obstetric comorbidi

261 % in 1981 to 47.1 % in 1995; the Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index, intensive use, 18.4% in

262 mine adequacy of prenatal care indicate that prenatal care utilization remained unchanged through the

263 For women with intensive prenatal care utilization, the preterm birth rate increa

264 that included maternal sociodemographic and prenatal care variables, the adjusted odds ratio of pret

265 en vs heterosexual women attended at least 1 prenatal care visit (56 [20.0%] vs 2459 [13.7%]; P = .00

266 y pregnancy loss occurring between the first prenatal care visit (usually 8 weeks) and the 19th compl

267 ratio, maternal smoking status at the first prenatal care visit and at 32 weeks' gestation, and othe

268 are delivery system, who attended at least 1 prenatal care visit and delivered a live birth between J

269 e whether stopping smoking between the first prenatal care visit and the 32nd week of pregnancy affec

270 is study, stopping smoking between the first prenatal care visit and week 32 of pregnancy prevented s

271 l outcomes when low-risk women are seen in a prenatal care visit schedule of fewer visits than routin

272 dy analyzed electronic health record data of prenatal care visits from the National COVID Cohort Coll

273 Home blood pressure measurement added to prenatal care visits was not associated with earlier dia

274 Prenatal care incorporating audio-only prenatal care visits.

275 ine pregnant females were recruited at their prenatal care visits.

276 HIV-focused ambulatory care, or had adequate prenatal care visits.

277 95% CI: 1.11, 1.24), women with fewer than 5 prenatal-care visits (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.60, 2.16), an

278 Median time to prenatal care was 56 days (IQR, 44-70 days).

279 Utilization of prenatal care was also associated with low birth weight.

280 For mild CHD, adequate plus prenatal care was associated with a lower probability of

281 In unadjusted analyses, inadequate prenatal care was associated with an increased risk of d

282 Timely prenatal care was categorized as prenatal care initiated

283 cies); in 6877 (84.0%; 95% CI, 83.2%-84.8%), prenatal care was initiated after 6 weeks or not at all.

284 Inadequate prenatal care was not associated with the risk of SGA de

285 oposed by the Expert Panel on the Content of Prenatal Care was observed.

286 the immigrant vs US-born disparity in timely prenatal care was similar to the preexpansion level (DID

287 Prenatal care was timely in 75.9% of immigrant women vs

288 ered infants at UMMS but who had received no prenatal care were also eligible.

289 ed emergency Medicaid benefits that included prenatal care were associated with an increased use of a

290 Socioeconomic status and access to prenatal care were not associated with either disorder.

291 private hospitals: the former received less prenatal care, were less educated, were more frequently

292 ealthcare services by delaying and canceling prenatal care, which may contribute to storm-impacted bi

293 s the proportion of pregnant women receiving prenatal care who had at least 1 dental visit during the

294 at 30 weeks of gestation to a mother without prenatal care who had prolonged rupture of the membranes

295 data on the amount, timing, and adequacy of prenatal care with the same data abstracted from the pre