ArticleTrials2018
Fair inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials: an integrated scientific and ethical approach.
Article in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 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
58 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials: A mixed-methods systematic review.PLoS medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Enabling pregnant women and their physicians to make informed medication decisions using artificial intelligence.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2020Pooled it
- An exploration of women's experience of taking part in a randomized controlled trial of a diagnostic test during pregnancy: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Trial
- Special Populations in Pivotal Clinical Trials: Eligibility and Supporting Evidence for Exclusion in EMA-Authorised Medicines.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Article
- Causal inference and digital twins: a roadmap for the future of clinical trials.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Rituximab for autoimmune blistering diseases in pregnancy and children: a clinical review.International journal of women's dermatology · 2026Review
- A White Paper on Advancing Long-Acting Therapeutics for Maternal and Pediatric Health by Bridging Gaps in Clinical Research, Access and Regulation.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Bridging disciplinary siloes: a scoping review on the inclusion and exclusion of pregnant and lactating populations in clinical research.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Prescribed medicines among pregnant women attending health facilities in Eritrea: patterns, safety, and determinants.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Populations Addressed in Vaccines Approved via the European Medicines Agency.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Observational birth cohorts for causal and predictive inference: The example of childhood asthma and allergic diseases.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2025Review
- Diversity in decentralized clinical trials: prioritizing inclusion of underrepresented groups.BMC medical ethics · 2025Review
- A Cross-Sectional Study of Sex, Race, and Ethnic Representation in Burn Registered Clinical Trials.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Motivation to Clinical Trial Participation: Health Information Distrust and Healthcare Access as Explanatory Variables and Gender as Moderator.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD) in Pregnancy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC).Global heart · 2025Article
- Use of the Sentinel System to Examine Medical Product Use and Outcomes During Pregnancy.Drug safety · 2024Review
- Article
- Comprehension of informed consent and voluntary participation in registration cohorts for phase IIb HIV vaccine trial in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: a qualitative descriptive study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Managing sickle cell disease and related complications in pregnancy: results of an international Delphi panel.Blood advances · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSince pregnant women are severely underrepresented in clinical research, many take the position that the exclusion of pregnant women from research must be justified unless there are compelling "scientific reasons" for their exclusion. However, it is questionable whether this approach renders research with pregnant women fair. This paper analyzes and evaluates when research with pregnant women can be considered as fair and what constitutes scientific reasons for exclusion.
methodsConceptual ethical and methodological analysis and evaluation of fair inclusion.
resultsFair inclusion of pregnant women means (1) that pregnant women who are eligible are not excluded solely for being pregnant and (2) that the research interests of pregnant women are prioritized, meaning that they ought to receive substantially more attention. Fairness does not imply that pregnant women should be included in virtually every research project, as including only a few pregnant women in a population consisting only of women will not help to determine the effectiveness and safety of a treatment in pregnant women. Separate trials in pregnant women may be preferable once we assume, or know, that effects of interventions in pregnant women differ from the effects in other subpopulations, or when we assume, or know, that there are no differences. In the latter case, it may be preferable to conduct post-marketing studies or establish registries. If there is no conclusive evidence indicating either differences or equivalence of effects between pregnant and non-pregnant women, yet it seems unlikely that major differences or exact equivalence exist, the inclusion of pregnant women should be sufficient. Depending on the research question, this boils down to representativeness in terms of the proportion of pregnant and non-pregnant women, or to oversampling pregnant women.
conclusionsFair inclusion of pregnant women in research implies that separate trials in pregnant women should be promoted. Inclusion of pregnant women has to be realized at the earliest phases of the research process. In addition to researchers and research ethics committees, scientific advisory councils, funders, drug regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical companies, journal editors and others have a joint responsibility to further develop the evidence base for drug use in pregnant women.
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.