ArticleBMJ open2021
A patient-clinician James Lind Alliance partnership to identify research priorities for hyperemesis gravidarum.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatments for hyperemesis gravidarum: A systematic review.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Pooled it
- Hyperemesis gravidarum and vitamin K deficiency: a systematic review.The British journal of nutrition · 2022Pooled it
- Watermelon and dietary advice compared to dietary advice alone following hospitalization for hyperemesis gravidarum: a randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Rating of four different foods in women with hyperemesis gravidarum: a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2021Trial
- 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
- 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
- Gut and Gastric Dysbiosis in Hyperemesis Gravidarum: A Scoping Review of Microbiome-Targeted Evidence and Translational Pathways.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- A scoping review of models of care and services for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- The impact and management of hyperemesis gravidarum: Current and future perspectives.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Interventions Initiated Before and After Pregnancy for Women who Experience Severe Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy: A Scoping Review.Maternal and child health journal · 2025Article
- Identifying research priorities for pregnant South Asian immigrants in Canada: A James Lind Alliance approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- Diagnosis and treatment of hyperemesis gravidarum.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024Review
- Hyperemesis gravidarum severity, enteral tube feeding and cardiometabolic markers in offspring cord blood.The British journal of nutrition · 2022Article
- Systematic evidence map of evidence addressing the top 10 priority research questions for hyperemesis gravidarum.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Assessment of management approaches for hyperemesis gravidarum and nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: a retrospective questionnaire analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Is Post-Burn Scarring a Research Priority?European burn journal · 2022Article
- Lack of catch-up in weight gain may intermediate between pregnancies with hyperemesis gravidarum and reduced fetal growth: the Japan Environment and Children's Study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Recurrence, postponing pregnancy, and termination rates after hyperemesis gravidarum: Follow up of the MOTHER study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2021Article
- The Contribution of Registered Dietitians in the Management of Hyperemesis Gravidarum in the United Kingdom.Nutrients · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 13 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThere are many uncertainties surrounding the aetiology, treatment and sequelae of hyperemesis gravidarum (HG). Prioritising research questions could reduce research waste, helping researchers and funders direct attention to those questions which most urgently need addressing. The HG priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to identify and rank the top 25 priority research questions important to both patients and clinicians.
methodsFollowing the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, an HG PSP steering group was established. Stakeholders representing patients, carers and multidisciplinary professionals completed an online survey to gather uncertainties. Eligible uncertainties related to HG. Uncertainties on nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and those on complementary treatments were not eligible. Questions were verified against the evidence. Two rounds of prioritisation included an online ranking survey and a 1-hour consensus workshop.
results1009 participants (938 patients/carers, 118 professionals with overlap between categories) submitted 2899 questions. Questions originated from participants in 26 different countries, and people from 32 countries took part in the first prioritisation stage. 66 unique questions emerged, which were evidence checked according to the agreed protocol. 65 true uncertainties were narrowed via an online ranking survey to 26 unranked uncertainties. The consensus workshop was attended by 19 international patients and clinicians who reached consensus on the top 10 questions for international researchers to address. More patients than professionals took part in the surveys but were equally distributed during the consensus workshop. Participants from low-income and middle-income countries noted that the priorities may be different in their settings.
conclusionsBy following the JLA method, a prioritised list of uncertainties relevant to both HG patients and their clinicians has been identified which can inform the international HG research agenda, funders and policy-makers. While it is possible to conduct an international PSP, results from developed countries may not be as relevant in low-income and middle-income countries.
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.