ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2020
Joint periviability counseling between neonatology and obstetrics is a rare occurrence.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a Joint-Specialty Simulation-Based Workshop to Optimize Counseling at Extreme Prematurity.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2026Article
- Maternal fetal medicine, obstetric, and neonatology perspectives on joint prenatal counseling at periviable gestational ages.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Decision making at extreme prematurity: Innovation in clinician education.Seminars in perinatology · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the frequency with which neonatal and maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) providers perform joint periviability counseling (JPC), compare content of counseling, and identify perceived barriers to JPC. STUDY
designAn anonymous REDCap survey was e-mailed to members of the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine and to members of the Society for MFM.
resultsThere were 424 neonatal and 115 MFM participants. Fifty-two percent of neonatal and 35% of MFM respondents reported rarely/never performing JPC (p < 0.001), while 80% and 82%, respectively felt it would improve counseling. Content of counseling was similar, except for length of stay with 93% of neonatal vs. 85% of MFM respondents addressing this (p = 0.03). The majority (>60%) of respondents in both groups reported that clinical duties posed a significant/great barrier to JPC.
conclusionJPC is recommended but infrequently performed, with both specialties interested in further collaboration to strengthen the counseling provided.
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.