Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32967876›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

The AEDUCATE Collaboration. Comprehensive antenatal education birth preparation programmes to reduce the rates of caesarean section in nulliparous women. Protocol for an individual participant data prospective meta-analysis.

Kate M Levett, Sarah J Lord, Hannah G Dahlen, Caroline A Smith, Federico Girosi, Soo Downe, Kenneth William Finlayson, Julie Fleet, Mary Steen, Mary-Ann Davey and 7 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Birth outcomes by type of attendance at antenatal education: An observational study.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2022
    Observational
  3. 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

17 authors.

Kate M LevettSchool of Medicine Sydney, University of Notre Dame Australia, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia kate.levett@nd.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-3784-4648
Sarah J LordSchool of Medicine Sydney, University of Notre Dame Australia, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2763-5949
Hannah G DahlenSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Western Sydney, Parramatta, New South Wales, Australia.
Caroline A SmithNICM Health Research Institute, University of Western Sydney, Penrith South, New South Wales, Australia.
Federico GirosiTranslational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3937-2285
Soo DowneSchool of Midwifery and Community Health, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK.
Kenneth William FinlaysonSchool of Midwifery and Community Health, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK.
Julie FleetSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Mary SteenSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Mary-Ann DaveyObstetrics & Gynaecology, Monash Health, Monash University Central Clinical School, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Elizabeth NewnhamSchool of Nursing & Midwifery, Griffith University, Medowbrook, Queensland, Australia.
Anette WernerDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Leslie ArnottThe B.E.A.R. Program, Lamaze Australia, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Kerry SutcliffeSchool of Medicine Sydney, University of Notre Dame Australia, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.
Anna Lene SeidlerNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0027-1623
Kylie Elizabeth HunterNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2796-9220
Lisa AskieNHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRates of medical interventions in normal labour and birth are increasing. This prospective meta-analysis (PMA) proposes to assess whether the addition of a comprehensive multicomponent birth preparation programme reduces caesarean section (CS) in nulliparous women compared with standard hospital care. Additionally, do participant characteristics, intervention components or hospital characteristics modify the effectiveness of the programme? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: OUTCOMES: STUDY

designAn individual participant data (IPD) prospective meta-analysis (PMA) of randomised controlled trials, including cluster design. Each trial is conducted independently but share core protocol elements to contribute data to the PMA. Participating trials are deemed eligible for the PMA if their results are not yet known outside their Data Monitoring Committees. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Participants in the individual trials will consent to participation, with respective trials receiving ethical approval by their local Human Research Ethics Committees. Individual datasets remain the property of trialists, and can be published prior to the publication of final PMA results. The overall data for meta-analysis will be held, analysed and published by the collaborative group, led by the Cochrane PMA group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020103857.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionPrenatal EducationFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMeta-Analysis as TopicParityParturitionPregnancyProspective Studiesantenatal educationcomplementary medicinematernal medicineobstetricspain management

Identifiers

PMID32967876
PMCPMC7513601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.