ArticleBMJ open2020
Research priorities for pregnancy hypertension: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral Antihypertensives for Nonsevere Pregnancy Hypertension: Systematic Review, Network Meta- and Trial Sequential Analyses.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2022Pooled it
- Updating unanswered questions for stillbirth research: refresh of the UK Stillbirth Priority Setting Partnership.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026Article
- A research agenda for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy in Ghana through a priority setting partnership.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Setting the research priorities for pregnancy scanning: a nationally coproduced vision with expectant women, the public and healthcare professionals.The British journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Serum autoantibody panel as a novel predictor for preeclampsia: a nested case-control study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Modelling lowering of raised blood pressure in pregnancy to reduce pre-eclampsia: secondary analysis of data from prospective cohort studies.BMJ medicine · 2026Article
- Identifying research priorities for pregnant South Asian immigrants in Canada: A James Lind Alliance approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- Pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of hypertension in pregnancy.Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy · 2024Review
- National priority setting partnership using a Delphi consensus process to develop neonatal research questions suitable for practice-changing randomised trials in the UK.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2023Article
- Cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study of self-testing for proteinuria during hypertensive pregnancies: The UDIP study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
- Article
- Postnatal health and care following hypertensive disorders in pregnancy: a prospective cohort study (BPiPP study).BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo identify research priorities for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy from individuals with lived experience and healthcare professionals.
designProspective surveys and consensus meetings using principles outlined by the James Lind Alliance.
settingUK.
methodsA steering group was established and 'uncertainties' were gathered using an online survey and literature search. An interim online survey ranked long-listed questions and the top 10 research questions were reached by consensus at a final prioritisation workshop.
participantsWomen, partners, relatives and friends of those with lived experience of pregnancy hypertension, researchers and healthcare professionals.
resultsThe initial online survey was answered by 278 participants (180 women with lived experience, 9 partners/relatives/friends, 71 healthcare professionals and 18 researchers). Together with a literature search, this identified 764 questions which were refined into 50 summary questions. All summary questions were presented in an interim prioritisation survey that was answered by 155 participants (87 women with lived experience, 4 partners/relatives/friends, 49 healthcare professionals and 15 researchers). The top 25 highest ranked questions were considered by the final prioritisation workshop. The top 10 uncertainties were identified by consensus and ranked as follows in order of priority: long-term consequences of pregnancy hypertension (for the woman and baby), short-term complications of pregnancy hypertension (for the woman and baby), screening tests for pre-eclampsia, prevention of long-term problems (for the woman and baby), causes of pregnancy hypertension, prevention of recurrent pregnancy hypertension, educational needs of healthcare professionals, diagnosis of pre-eclampsia, management of pregnancy hypertension, provision of support for women and families.
conclusionsResearch priorities shared by those with lived experience of pregnancy hypertension and healthcare professionals have been identified. Researchers should use these to inform the choice of future studies in this area.
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.