SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2017
Specialist antenatal clinics for women at high risk of preterm birth: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative research.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review regarding women's emotional and psychological experiences of high-risk pregnancies.BMC psychology · 2020Pooled it
- The use of specialised preterm birth clinics for women at high risk of spontaneous preterm birth: a systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Pooled it
- Ethnic group, socioeconomic position and pregnancy outcome: a mediation model through latent class.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2025Article
- Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of preterm live births in a tertiary health facility in Ghana.PloS one · 2025Article
- Anxiety, depression, and perceived wellbeing in antenatal women at risk of preterm birth: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
- Review
- Should case management be considered a component of obstetrical interventions for pregnancies at risk of preterm birth?American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Review
- Interventions for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth: a scoping review of systematic reviews.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Protocol for the IMPART study: IMplementation of the preterm birth surveillance PAthway - a RealisT evaluation.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Article
- Vaginal progesterone for prevention of preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women with a normal cervical length: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Risk factors associated with adverse maternal outcomes following intrapartum cesarean birth: a secondary analysis of the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health, 2004-2008.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Article
- Cervical Characterization with Tactile-Ultrasound Probe.Open journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Article
- Effect of cell-free fetal DNA on spontaneous preterm labor.Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPreterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Women with previous prenatal loss are at higher risk of preterm birth. A specialist antenatal clinic is considered as one approach to improve maternity and pregnancy outcomes.
methodsA systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed method studies conducted on women at high risk of preterm birth (PTB). The review primary outcomes were to report on the specialist antenatal clinics effect in preventing or reducing preterm birth, perinatal mortality and morbidity and women's perceptions and experiences of a specialist clinic whether compared or not compared with standard antenatal care. Other secondary maternal, infant and economic outcomes were also determined. A comprehensive search strategy was carried out in English within electronic databases as far back as 1980. The reviewers selected studies, assessed the quality, and extracted data independently. Results were summarized and tabulated.
resultsEleven studies fully met the review inclusion criteria, ten were quantitative design studies and only one was a qualitative design study. No mixed method design study was included in the review. All were published after 1989, seven were conducted in the USA and four in the UK. Results from five good to low quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs), all conducted before 1990, did not illustrate the efficacy of the clinic in reducing preterm birth. Whereas results from more recent low quality cohort studies showed some positive neonatal outcomes. Themes from one good quality qualitative study reflected on the emotional and psychological need to reduce anxiety and stress of women referred to such a clinic. Women expressed their negative emotional responses at being labelled as high risk and positive responses to being assessed and treated in the clinic. Women also reported that their partners were struggling to cope emotionally.
conclusionsFindings from this review were mixed. Evidence from cohort studies indicated a specialist clinic may be a means of predicting or preventing preterm birth. Testing this in a randomised controlled trial is desirable, though may be hard to achieve due to the growing focus of such clinics on managing women at high risk of preterm birth. Ongoing research has to recognize women's experiences and perceptions of such a clinic. Further clarification of the optimal referral route and a clear and standardized management and cost economic evaluation plan are also required. Fathers support and experience of PTB clinics should also be included in further research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.