Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31039749›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2019

Pregnant women's experiences and perceptions of participating in the EVERREST prospective study; a qualitative study.

Merryl E Harvey, Anna L David, Jade Dyer, Rebecca Spencer

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Maternal-Fetal Surgery: Does Recognising Fetal Patienthood Pose a Threat to Pregnant Women's Autonomy?Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2021
    Article
  5. Reviewing the womb.Journal of medical ethics · 2020
    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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Merryl E HarveyFaculty of Health, Education and Life Sciences, Birmingham City University, City South Campus, Westbourne Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 3TN, UK.
Anna L DavidEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7DN, UK.
Jade DyerComprehensive Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK.
Rebecca SpencerEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 86-98 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX, UK. rebecca.spencer@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3019-0322
Birmingham City University · GBInstitute for Reproductive Health · USMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GBNational Institute for Health Research · GB

Funding

European Union Seventh Framework Programme 305823National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre BRC326/III/RS/101350
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe EVERREST Prospective Study is a multicentre observational cohort study of pregnancies affected by severe early-onset fetal growth restriction. The study recruits women with singleton pregnancies where the estimated fetal weight is less than the 3rd centile and below 600 g, between 20 + 0 and 26 + 6 weeks of pregnancy, in the absence of a known chromosomal, structural or infective cause.

methodThe reported study was retrospective descriptive qualitative interview study of women who had participated in the EVERREST Prospective Study. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of pregnant women taking part in research during a pregnancy affected by severe early-onset fetal growth restriction. Audio-recorded semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 women, at least 1 year after delivery of their baby. Two of these pregnancies had ended in stillbirth and one in neonatal death, reflecting the outcomes seen in the EVERREST Prospective Study. Participants gave informed consent, were 16 years or older and were interviewed in English. A topic guide was used to ensure a consistent approach. Questions focused on pregnancy experiences, involvement with the EVERREST study and potential involvement in future research. Recordings were transcribed verbatim for thematic analysis using NVivo10.

resultsFour broad themes were identified; 'before joining the EVERREST Prospective Study', 'participating in research', 'information and support' and 'looking back and looking forwards'. Each broad theme incorporated several subthemes. All participants recalled their reaction to being told their baby was smaller than expected. The way this news was given had a lasting impact. A range of benefits of participation in the EVERREST Prospective Study were described and the participants were positive about the way it was conducted. As a consequence, they were receptive to participating in future research. However, the findings suggest that research teams should be sensitive when approaching families at a difficult time or when they are already participating in other research.

conclusionsThis study highlights the willingness of pregnant women to participate in research and identifies strategies for researchers to engage participants.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleFetal Growth RetardationHumansMiddle AgedObservational Studies as TopicPregnancyPregnant PeoplePrenatal CareProspective StudiesQualitative ResearchResearch SubjectsRetrospective StudiesExperienceFetal growth restrictionInterviewPlacental insufficiencyPregnancyQualitativeWomen

Identifiers

PMID31039749
PMCPMC6492343
OpenAlexW2947630782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.