Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30294945›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2019

PARENTS 2 study: consensus report for parental engagement in the perinatal mortality review process.

D Bakhbakhi, D Siassakos, M Lynch, L Timlin, C Storey, A Heazell, C Burden, Parents Collaborative Group

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Verbal Information From Parents About Stillbirth: The VIPS Study (Phase One).The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2025
    Article
  3. Family Interviews Improve Health Service Recommendations in Mortality Review Process: A Mixed-Methods Assessment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Bereaved parents involvement in maternity hospital perinatal death review processes: 'Nobody even thought to ask us anything'.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

D BakhbakhiCentre for Academic Women's Health, University of Bristol, Chilterns, Women's Health, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1906-5069
D SiassakosEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.
M LynchNorth Bristol NHS Trust, Westbury on Trym, Bristol, UK.
L TimlinNorth Bristol NHS Trust, Westbury on Trym, Bristol, UK.
C StoreyInternational Stillbirth Alliance.
A HeazellManchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
C BurdenCentre for Academic Women's Health, University of Bristol, Chilterns, Women's Health, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.
Parents Collaborative Group

Funding

National Institute of Health Researchstillbirth and neonatal death charityThe Health Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe PARENTS 1 study (Parents' Active Role and ENgagement in The review of their Stillbirth/perinatal death) found that parents would endorse the opportunity to give feedback into the perinatal mortality review (PNMR) process. In subsequent focus groups, healthcare professionals were positive about parental engagement, although they considered that there may be significant challenges. The objective of this study was to develop core principles and recommendations for parental engagement in PNMR in the UK.

methodsA two-round Delphi technique was followed to reach consensus on core principles for parental engagement in the PNMR process; Round 1 included a national consensus workshop and Round 2 an online questionnaire. The consensus meeting was attended by a national panel of stakeholders (clinical and academic experts, parent advocates, managers and commissioners) in stillbirth and neonatal and bereavement care. To develop recommendations for parental engagement, participants discussed four key areas comprising: communication with parents, including receiving feedback; the format of the PNMR meeting; the parental engagement pathway; and challenging aspects of engaging with parents in reviews. Content analysis was conducted to generate recommendations from the meeting for a subsequent anonymous web-based survey. Attendees of the consensus workshop and members of the PARENTS 2 Project Advisory Board were asked to rank recommendations using a 9-point Likert scale from 1 (not important) to 9 (critically important). It had been agreed a priori, in compliance with established Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, that 'consensus' would be achieved if over 70% of participants scored the principle as 'critical' (score of 7-9) and fewer than 15% scored the principle as 'not important' (score of 1-3). Principles for which consensus was achieved were included in the core recommendations.

resultsOf the 29 invited stakeholders, 22 participated in the consensus meeting and 25 (86% response rate) in the subsequent online questionnaire in June 2017. Consensus was agreed on 12 core principles. Of the 25 participants, 96% agreed that a face-to-face explanation of the PNMR process was of critical importance, 72% considered that parents should be offered the opportunity to nominate a suitable advocate, 92% believed that responses to parents' comments should be formally documented, 96% indicated that it was vital for action plans to be translated into lessons learnt and that this process should be monitored, and 100% of stakeholders voted that a plain-English summary should be produced for the parents following the meeting. There was good agreement on a further seven principles.

conclusionsKey national stakeholders were unanimously supportive of parental engagement in the PNMR process and agreed on core principles to make this process feasible, meaningful and robust. A 6-month pilot of parental engagement in the PNMR process (PARENTS 2 study) in two UK units took place after the consensus on core principles. In collaboration with the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, the findings will inform the national standardized PNMR tool. © 2018 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCommunicationDelphi TechniqueFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHumansInfant, NewbornMaleParentsPerinatal DeathPerinatal MortalityStakeholder ParticipationStillbirthSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomhealthcare improvementneonatal deathparental engagementpatient safetyperinatal mortality review processstillbirth

Identifiers

PMID30294945
PMCPMC6772129

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.