Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34280227›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Perceptions of risk in pregnancy with chronic disease: A systematic review and thematic synthesis.

Elizabeth R Ralston, Priscilla Smith, Joseph Chilcot, Sergio A Silverio, Kate Bramham

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Kidney disease and reproductive health.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth R RalstonDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6729-4635
Priscilla SmithDepartment of Renal Medicine, King's Kidney Care Centre, King's College Hospital, National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Joseph ChilcotDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Sergio A SilverioDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7177-3471
Kate BramhamDepartment of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
King's College London · GBNational Health Service · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen with chronic disease are at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Pregnancies which pose higher risk, often require increased medical supervision and intervention. How women perceive their pregnancy risk and its impact on health behaviour is poorly understood. The aim of this systematic review of qualitative literature is to evaluate risk perceptions of pregnancy in women with chronic disease.

methodsEleven electronic databases including grey literature were systematically searched for qualitative studies published in English which reported on pregnancy, risk perception and chronic disease. Full texts were reviewed by two researchers, independently. Quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative checklist and data were synthesised using a thematic synthesis approach. The analysis used all text under the findings or results section from each included paper as data. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO.

resultsEight studies were included in the review. Three themes with sub-themes were constructed from the analysis including: Information Synthesis (Sub-themes: Risk to Self and Risk to Baby), Psychosocial Factors (Sub-themes: Emotional Response, Self-efficacy, Healthcare Relationship), and Impact on Behaviour (Sub-themes: Perceived Risk and Objective Risk). Themes fitted within an overarching concept of Balancing Act. The themes together inter-relate to understand how women with chronic disease perceive their risk in pregnancy.

conclusionsWomen's pregnancy-related behaviour and engagement with healthcare services appear to be influenced by their perception of pregnancy risk. Women with chronic disease have risk perceptions which are highly individualised. Assessment and communication of women's pregnancy risk should consider their own understanding and perception of risk. Different chronic diseases introduce diverse pregnancy risks and further research is needed to understand women's risk perceptions in specific chronic diseases.

Indexed as

AdultChronic DiseaseData ManagementFemaleHealth BehaviorHumansPerceptionPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnant PeopleRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID34280227
PMCPMC8289065
OpenAlexW3185683099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.