ArticleThe Hastings Center report2017
Research with Pregnant Women: New Insights on Legal Decision-Making.
Article in The Hastings Center report, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Equity in clinical trials for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis: A systematic review of global representation and inclusion of patients and researchers.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Bridging disciplinary siloes: a scoping review on the inclusion and exclusion of pregnant and lactating populations in clinical research.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Identifying and assessing the capacity and experience of trial sites in low- and middle-income countries for high-quality randomised drug trials in maternal and perinatal health.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Shifting from Equality toward Equity: Addressing Disparities in Research Participation for Clinical Cancer Research.The Journal of clinical ethics · 2024Article
- Creating an ignorance-base: Exploring known unknowns in the scientific literature.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2023Article
- Ethical research when abortion access is legally restricted.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Physician Perspectives on Including Pregnant Women in Covid-19 Clinical Trials: Time for a Paradigm Change.Ethics & human research · 2021Article
- Pregnant women & vaccines against emerging epidemic threats: Ethics guidance for preparedness, research, and response.Vaccine · 2021Review
- Identifying and classifying goals for scientific knowledge.Bioinformatics advances · 2021Article
- Inclusion of pregnant women in antiretroviral drug research: what is needed to move forwards?Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2019Article
- Article
- Ethics, regulation, and beyond: the landscape of research with pregnant women.Reproductive health · 2017Article
- Ethical challenges posed by clinical trials in preterm labor: a case study.Reproductive health · 2017Article
- Policies for the Inclusion of Pregnant Women in Research: Results from an International and a US Study.Ethics & human 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
U.S. researchers and scholars often point to two legal factors as significant obstacles to the inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research: the Department of Health and Human Services' regulatory limitations specific to pregnant women's research participation and the fear of liability for potential harm to children born following a pregnant woman's research participation. This article offers a more nuanced view of the potential legal complexities that can impede research with pregnant women than has previously been reflected in the literature. It reveals new insights into the role of legal professionals throughout the research pathway, from product conception to market, and it highlights a variety of legal factors influencing decision-making that may slow or halt research involving pregnant women. Our conclusion is that closing the evidence gap created by the underrepresentation and exclusion of pregnant women in research will require targeted attention to the role of legal professionals and the legal factors that influence their decisions.
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.