Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25100034›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2014

Maternal and perinatal health research priorities beyond 2015: an international survey and prioritization exercise.

Joao Paulo Souza, Mariana Widmer, Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu, Theresa Anne Lawrie, Ebunoluwa Aderonke Adejuyigbe, Guillermo Carroli, Caroline Crowther, Sheena M Currie, Therese Dowswell, Justus Hofmeyr and 25 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

35 authors.

Joao Paulo SouzaUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. jpsouza@fmrp.usp.br.
Mariana Widmer
Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu
Theresa Anne Lawrie
Ebunoluwa Aderonke Adejuyigbe
Guillermo Carroli
Caroline Crowther
Sheena M Currie
Therese Dowswell
Justus Hofmeyr
Tina Lavender
Joy Lawn
Silke Mader
Francisco Eulógio Martinez
Kidza Mugerwa
Zahida Qureshi
Maria Asuncion Silvestre
Hora Soltani
Maria Regina Torloni
Eleni Z Tsigas
Zoe Vowles
Léopold Ouedraogo
Suzanne Serruya
Jamela Al-Raiby
Narimah Awin
Hiromi Obara
Matthews Mathai
Rajiv Bahl
José Martines
Bela Ganatra
Sharon Jelena Phillips
Brooke Ronald Johnson
Joshua P Vogel
Olufemi T Oladapo
Marleen Temmerman

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaternal mortality has declined by nearly half since 1990, but over a quarter million women still die every year of causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. Maternal-health related targets are falling short of the 2015 Millennium Development Goals and a post-2015 Development Agenda is emerging. In connection with this, setting global research priorities for the next decade is now required.

methodsWe adapted the methods of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to identify and set global research priorities for maternal and perinatal health for the period 2015 to 2025. Priority research questions were received from various international stakeholders constituting a large reference group, and consolidated into a final list of research questions by a technical working group. Questions on this list were then scored by the reference working group according to five independent and equally weighted criteria. Normalized research priority scores (NRPS) were calculated, and research priority questions were ranked accordingly.

resultsA list of 190 priority research questions for improving maternal and perinatal health was scored by 140 stakeholders. Most priority research questions (89%) were concerned with the evaluation of implementation and delivery of existing interventions, with research subthemes frequently concerned with training and/or awareness interventions (11%), and access to interventions and/or services (14%). Twenty-one questions (11%) involved the discovery of new interventions or technologies.

conclusionsKey research priorities in maternal and perinatal health were identified. The resulting ranked list of research questions provides a valuable resource for health research investors, researchers and other stakeholders. We are hopeful that this exercise will inform the post-2015 Development Agenda and assist donors, research-policy decision makers and researchers to invest in research that will ultimately make the most significant difference in the lives of mothers and babies.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesMaternal WelfareResearchData CollectionFemaleHumansInfantInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornMaternal MortalityPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID25100034
PMCPMC4132282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.