Back

Understanding preconception care practices, beliefs, and attitudes in Australian primary care: A qualitative study of health professionals

Caut, C.; Schoenaker, D.; McIntyre, E.; Steel, A.

2025-01-19 public and global health
10.1101/2025.01.16.25320103 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPrimary care is well placed to provide preconception care. To support primary care professionals in meeting the preconception care needs of prospective parents, an understanding of their perspectives and experiences of providing preconception care is needed. As women consult with a range of primary care health professionals for preconception care, including general practitioners (GPs), midwives, and naturopaths, this study aimed to explore these health professions beliefs and attitudes towards preconception care and describe their preconception care practice behaviours in Australia. MethodsQualitative methods were employed. Focus groups and interviews with health professionals (n=18) in clinical practice (more than 5 years) within Australia were conducted between May and August 2021. Health professionals comprised GPs (n=6), midwives (n=5), and naturopaths (n=7) and were recruited through professional organisations. Fieldwork explored the practice services provided, beliefs and attitudes towards preconception care, and preconception care practice behaviours. Data analysis used a framework thematic analysis approach. ResultsThree major themes were identified: Defining preconception health and care (subthemes: defining preconception health and defining preconception care), Understanding primary practitioners role in preconception care (subthemes: the GPs role as central to preconception care, role is holistic, educational, and empowering and role of personal experience and gender in being a preconception care provider), and Situating preconception care in primary care practice (subthemes: preconception care patient populations, preconception care within broader health services and preconception health information sources are varied). ConclusionsWhile health professionals shared similar views on the factors that comprise preconception health, some components of preconception health differed among the health professional groups. Although it is universally agreed that GPs are key providers of preconception care, they are not the only health professionals with a role. A wider range of health professionals could aid in meeting the preconception care needs of people of reproductive age with greater coordination among them. To improve the provision of multi-disciplinary preconception care further insights into shared and complementary responsibilities among health professionals in primary care settings are needed.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 9%
18.7%
2
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.8%
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 1%
12.4%
4
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
5
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
6
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.1%
7
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.6%
8
British Journal of General Practice
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.5%
9
Palliative Medicine
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.5%
10
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
11
BMJ Paediatrics Open
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
12
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
13
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
15
European Journal of Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
16
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
17
Public Health
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
18
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
19
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
20
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
21
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
23
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
24
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%