ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2020
Provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey of junior doctors in the UK National Health Service.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 5 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Maternity care during COVID-19: a qualitative evidence synthesis of women's and maternity care providers' views and experiences.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The worldwide impact of COVID-19 on cancer care: A meta-analysis of surveys published after the first wave of the pandemic.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Reproductive justice in the time of COVID-19: a systematic review of the indirect impacts of COVID-19 on sexual and reproductive health.Reproductive health · 2021Pooled it
- Slipping through the net: a qualitative study exploring women's experiences of maternity in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Glycaemic control in labour with diabetes: GILD, a scoping study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Predictive Factors of Physicians' Satisfaction and Quality of Work Under Teleconsultation Conditions: Structural Equation Analysis.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Diagnosis and management of endometrial hyperplasia: A UK national audit of adherence to national guidance 2012-2020.PLoS medicine · 2024Article
- A consensus statement on perinatal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and recommendations for post-pandemic recovery and re-build.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
- Article
- Perspectives on training in obstetrics and gynaecology during the COVID-19 pandemic: Thematic analysis of trainee responses from a pan-European survey.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2023Article
- Article
- The challenge of estimating the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 interventions - Toward an integrated economic and epidemiological approach.Economics and human biology · 2023Review
- Effect of COVID-19 on antenatal care: experiences of medical professionals in the Netherlands.Reproductive health · 2023Article
- Provision and utilization of maternal health services during the COVID-19 pandemic in 16 hospitals in sub-Saharan Africa.Frontiers in global women's health · 2023Article
- Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the Korean Version of the Pandemic-Related Pregnancy Stress Scale.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Article
- Obstetric services in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national survey.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is disrupting health services worldwide. We aimed to evaluate the provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services in the UK during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.
designInterview-based national survey.
settingWomen's healthcare units in the National Health Service. POPULATION: Junior doctors in obstetrics and gynaecology.
methodsParticipants were interviewed by members of the UK Audit and Research in Obstetrics and Gynaecology trainees' collaborative between 28 March and 7 April 2020. We used a quantitative analysis for closed-ended questions and a thematic framework analysis for open comments.
resultsWe received responses from 148/155 units (95%), most of the participants were in years 3-7 of training (121/148, 82%). Most completed specific training drills for managing obstetric and gynaecological emergencies in women with COVID-19 (89/148, 60.1%) and two-person donning and doffing of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (96/148, 64.9%). The majority of surveyed units implemented COVID-19-specific protocols (130/148, 87.8%), offered adequate PPE (135/148, 91.2%) and operated dedicated COVID-19 emergency theatres (105/148, 70.8%). Most units reduced face-to-face antenatal clinics (117/148, 79.1%) and suspended elective gynaecology services (131/148, 88.5%). The 2-week referral pathway for oncological gynaecology was not affected in half of the units (76/148, 51.4%), but half reported a planned reduction in oncology surgery (82/148, 55.4%).
conclusionThe provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services in the UK during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic seems to be in line with current guidelines, but strategic planning is needed to restore routine gynaecology services and ensure safe access to maternity care in the long term. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Provision of obstetrics and gynaecology services during the acute phase of COVID-19 is in line with current guidelines, strategic planning is needed to restore routine services and ensure safe access to care in the long term.
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.