Background Understanding consumers’ health information needs across all stages of the pregnancy trajectory is crucial to the development of mechanisms that allow them to retrieve high-quality, customized, and layperson-friendly health information. Objective The objective of this study was to identify research gaps in pregnancy-related consumer information needs and available information from different sources. Methods We conducted a systematic review of CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, and Web of Science for relevant articles that were published from 2009 to 2019. The quality of the included articles was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program. A descriptive data analysis was performed on these articles. Based on the review result, we developed the Pregnancy Information Needs Ontology (PINO) and made it publicly available in GitHub and BioPortal. Results A total of 33 articles from 9 countries met the inclusion criteria for this review, of which the majority were published no earlier than 2016. Most studies were either descriptive (9/33, 27%), interviews (7/33, 21%), or surveys/questionnaires (7/33, 21%); 20 articles mentioned consumers’ pregnancy-related information needs. Half (9/18, 50%) of the human-subject studies were conducted in the United States. More than a third (13/33, 39%) of all studies focused on during-pregnancy stage; only one study (1/33, 3%) was about all stages of pregnancy. The most frequent consumer information needs were related to labor delivery (9/20, 45%), medication in pregnancy (6/20, 30%), newborn care (5/20, 25%), and lab tests (6/20, 30%). The most frequently available source of information was the internet (15/24, 63%). PINO consists of 267 classes, 555 axioms, and 271 subclass relationships. Conclusions Only a few articles assessed the barriers to access to pregnancy-related information and the quality of each source of information; further work is needed. Future work is also needed to address the gaps between the information needed and the information available.

Introduction Obesity is a common disease and a known risk factor for many other conditions such as hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and cancer. Treatment options for obesity include lifestyle changes, pharmacotherapy, and surgical interventions such as bariatric surgery. In this study, we examine the use of prescription drugs and dietary supplements by the individuals with obesity. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data 2003–2018. We used multivariate logistic regression to analyze the correlations of demographics and obesity status with the use of prescription drugs and dietary supplement use. We also built machine learning models to classify prescription drug and dietary supplement use using demographic data and obesity status. Results Individuals with obesity are more likely to take cardiovascular agents (OR = 2.095, 95% CI 1.989–2.207) and metabolic agents (OR = 1.658, 95% CI 1.573–1.748) than individuals without obesity. Gender, age, race, poverty income ratio, and insurance status are significantly correlated with dietary supplement use. The best performing model for classifying prescription drug use had the accuracy of 74.3% and the AUROC of 0.82. The best performing model for classifying dietary supplement use had the accuracy of 65.3% and the AUROC of 0.71. Conclusions This study can inform clinical practice and patient education of the use of prescription drugs and dietary supplements and their correlation with obesity.

One government source regarding clinical trials is Clinicaltrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov), which is available to health information seekers as a resource to find information about past, current, and recruiting clinical trials. Currently, if you participate in a clinical trial you are required to provide your “informed consent.” This means you have been informed of the risks, benefits, purpose of the study, and your rights. This information is provided to you so that you, as the potential participant, can make an informed decision before deciding whether or not to participate. If you work with or in research, you will become very familiar with the term IRB, which stands for “Institutional Review Board.” An IRB is a panel intended to oversee the entire scope of one or more medical research studies including protecting the rights and welfare of human research subjects. Although it may seem like common sense that these two things are necessary, there was a time when they did not exist. A new approach to bioethics and the regulation of clinical trials and medical studies using living human subjects came about from public and governmental outrage over one study, known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. By looking specifically at this case, which led to the rise of bioethics at the federal-government level in the 1970s, the origin of IRBs and informed consent as they relate to medical studies and human subjects will be illuminated. The issues of IRBs, informed consent, and bioethics are important in the library and information science community because we often interact with a public that is impacted by the policies and regulations related to these issues. In addition, we are the very researchers, or hold relationships with researchers, that are held to the strict standards set in place by IRBs and bioethics in general.

BACKGROUND Understanding consumers’ health information needs across all stages of the pregnancy trajectory is crucial to the development of mechanisms that allow them to retrieve high-quality, customized, and layperson-friendly health information. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to identify research gaps in pregnancy-related consumer information needs and available information from different sources. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, and Web of Science for relevant articles that were published from 2009 to 2019. The quality of the included articles was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program. A descriptive data analysis was performed on these articles. Based on the review result, we developed the Pregnancy Information Needs Ontology (PINO) and made it publicly available in GitHub and BioPortal. RESULTS A total of 33 articles from 9 countries met the inclusion criteria for this review, of which the majority were published no earlier than 2016. Most studies were either descriptive (9/33, 27%), interviews (7/33, 21%), or surveys/questionnaires (7/33, 21%); 20 articles mentioned consumers’ pregnancy-related information needs. Half (9/18, 50%) of the human-subject studies were conducted in the United States. More than a third (13/33, 39%) of all studies focused on during-pregnancy stage; only one study (1/33, 3%) was about all stages of pregnancy. The most frequent consumer information needs were related to labor delivery (9/20, 45%), medication in pregnancy (6/20, 30%), newborn care (5/20, 25%), and lab tests (6/20, 30%). The most frequently available source of information was the internet (15/24, 63%). PINO consists of 267 classes, 555 axioms, and 271 subclass relationships. CONCLUSIONS Only a few articles assessed the barriers to access to pregnancy-related information and the quality of each source of information; further work is needed. Future work is also needed to address the gaps between the information needed and the information available.