Abstract
Objective: To examine whether multiparous women have more or less folic acid uptake than primiparous women. Outcomes: Preconceptional, periconceptional and postconceptional folic acid use among all pregnant women and high risk pregnant women. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE-Ovid, CINAHL Ultimate, Scopus and ProQuest Medical. Eligibility criteria: Observational epidemiological studies comparing folic acid use between primiparous and multiparous women, published in English from January 1994 to June 2024. Data extraction and synthesis: Two reviewers screened all papers meeting the eligibility criteria. One reviewer completed data extraction and assessed study quality using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Three other reviewers independently assessed 10% of the studies as a quality check. Random-effects (DerSimonian and Laird) meta-analyses combined results for each outcome. Heterogeneity, risk of publication bias and certainty of evidence were assessed. Results: Of the 10 982 records identified, 81 studies involving 826 855 women were included in the review. 27 studies were conducted in Europe, 22 in Asia, 11 in North America, 7 in Africa, 7 in Australia, 5 in the Middle East and 2 in South America. Multiparous women were consistently less likely to take folic acid before and during pregnancy than primiparous women. For preconceptional use, the odds were 29% lower among multiparous women (adjusted OR (aOR): 0.71; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.78; n=25 studies; I2=88.67%), and 58% lower in multiparous high-risk women (aOR: 0.42, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.64; n=3 studies; I2=27.28%). For periconceptional use, the odds were 32% lower among multiparous women (aOR: 0.68; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.74; n=28 studies; I2=85.46%). Postconception, the odds were 21% lower among multiparous women (aOR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.85; n=33 studies; I2=85.91%). By the second trimester, there was no significant difference between the two parity groups (aOR: 0.96; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; n=4 studies; I2=0.00%). The certainty of evidence was low for preconceptional, periconceptional and postconceptional uptake due to heterogeneity, and moderate for preconceptional uptake among high-risk women. Conclusions: Multiparous women were less likely to take folic acid preconceptional, periconceptional and postconceptionally, despite their previous pregnancy experience. Barriers to folic acid supplement uptake among multiparous women need to be identified, and strategies to address them in preconception, antenatal and interconception care should be investigated. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024553241.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-17 |
| Journal | BMJ Open |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| Early online date | 4 May 2026 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published (in print/issue) - 30 May 2026 |
Bibliographical note
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2026. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ Group.Data Availability Statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. All data relevant to the review are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.Funding
This review was produced as part of a PhD studentship funded by the Department for the Economy (Northern Ireland) and Ulster University. The funder had no role in the review design, data collection and analysis, publication decision, or manuscript preparation. Additional funding was provided by the Economic and Social Research Council (Project Reference: ES/W010240/1).
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
Keywords
- Pregnancy
- Pregnant women
- Public Health
- Primary health care
- Folic Acid
- Parity
- Interconception Care
- Antenatal Care
- Preconception Care
- Humans
- Folic Acid/administration & dosage
- Female
- Dietary Supplements
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Does previous pregnancy experience improve folic acid supplementation uptake? A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.-
Does parity matter? Folic acid supplementation in primiparous (first-time) versus multiparous mothers: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Ebong, U., Wilson, J., Given, J., Casey, F., Loane, M. & Dolk, H., 25 Mar 2025, (Unpublished).Research output: Contribution to conference › Poster
File -
Does previous antenatal care improve folic acid uptake in subsequent pregnancies? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ebong, U., Wilson, J., Given, J., Casey, F., Loane, M. & Dolk, H., 2 Nov 2025, 51st Annual Meeting of the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research (ICBDSR). p. 14 15 p.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution
-
Does previous pregnancy and antenatal care experience improve folic acid supplementation uptake? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Ebong, U., Wilson, J., Given, J., Casey, F., Loane, M. & Dolk, H., 6 Jun 2025, (Unpublished).Research output: Contribution to conference › Abstract
Prizes
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver