Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30537958›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Standardized outcome measures for pregnancy and childbirth, an ICHOM proposal.

Malini Anand Nijagal, Stephanie Wissig, Caleb Stowell, Elizabeth Olson, Isis Amer-Wahlin, Gouke Bonsel, Allyson Brooks, Matthew Coleman, Shamala Devi Karalasingam, James M N Duffy and 16 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05555095 (The Medicaid Innovation Collaborative), which is not on this map. Cited by 85 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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.

NCT05555095 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

The Medicaid Innovation Collaborative (MIC) Experience: Transforming Care Through Digital Health: A Mixed Methods Analysis

TypeobservationalSponsorOSF Healthcare SystemRan2022 to 2028Enrolled19,331ConditionsHypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, Maternal HealthArmsdigital health delivered multicomponent intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Global prevalence and risk factors of obstetric violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

26 authors.

Malini Anand NijagalUniversity of California, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Stephanie WissigInternational Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Caleb StowellInternational Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Elizabeth OlsonInternational Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Isis Amer-WahlinKarolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Gouke BonselErasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Allyson BrooksHoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Newport Beach, CA, USA.
Matthew ColemanUniversity Hospital Southampton, Hampshire, UK.
Shamala Devi KaralasingamNational Clinical Research Centre, Ministry of Health, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
James M N DuffyBalliol College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tracy FlanaganKaiser Permanente, Richmond, CA, USA.
Stefan GebhardtStellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
Meridith E GreeneMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Floris GroenendaalUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
J Ravichandran R JeganathanSultanah Aminah Hospital, Johor Ministry of Health, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Tessa KowaliwSouth Australian Maternity Reform Association (SAMRA) Inc, Adelaide, Australia.
Marije Lamain-de-RuiterUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Elliott MainCalifornia Maternal Quality Care Collaborative, Stanford, CA, USA.
Michelle OwensUniversity of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
Rod PetersenWomen and Children's Health Network, North Adelaide, South Australia.
Irwin ReissUniversity Hospital Southampton, Hampshire, UK.
Carol SakalaNational Partnership for Women & Families, Washington, D.C., USA.
Anna Maria SpecialeAmerican College of Nurse Midwives, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Rachel ThompsonThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Oluwakemi OkunadeInternational Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Arie FranxInternational Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, Cambridge, MA, USA. A.Franx-2@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8801-5546

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2014-07-051
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundValue-based health care aims to optimize the balance of patient outcomes and health care costs. To improve value in perinatal care using this strategy, standard outcomes must first be defined. The objective of this work was to define a minimum, internationally appropriate set of outcome measures for evaluating and improving perinatal care with a focus on outcomes that matter to women and their families.

methodsAn interdisciplinary and international Working Group was assembled. Existing literature and current measurement initiatives were reviewed. Serial guided discussions and validation surveys provided consumer input. A series of nine teleconferences, incorporating a modified Delphi process, were held to reach consensus on the proposed Standard Set.

resultsThe Working Group selected 24 outcome measures to evaluate care during pregnancy and up to 6 months postpartum. These include clinical outcomes such as maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity, stillbirth, preterm birth, birth injury and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mental health, mother-infant bonding, confidence and success with breastfeeding, incontinence, and satisfaction with care and birth experience. To support analysis of these outcome measures, pertinent baseline characteristics and risk factor metrics were also defined.

conclusionsWe propose a set of outcome measures for evaluating the care that women and infants receive during pregnancy and the postpartum period. While validation and refinement via pilot implementation projects are needed, we view this as an important initial step towards value-based improvements in care.

Indexed as

ConsensusDelivery, ObstetricDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMother-Child RelationsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPerinatal CarePregnancyPregnancy OutcomePremature BirthQuality of LifeRisk FactorsConsensusDelivery outcomesDELPHI processHealth outcomesObstetricsOutcome measuresPatient-centred outcomesPatient-reportedPerinatal healthPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID30537958
PMCPMC6290550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.