ArticleBMJ open2022
Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for stillbirth care research (iCHOOSE Study).
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to Improve Outcomes After Pregnancy Loss: A Systematic Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- What Should Be Discussed When Considering a Vaginal Birth? A Delphi Consensus Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Article
- A Core Outcome Set for Stillbirth Care: An International Consensus Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Article
- A meta-core outcome set for stillbirth prevention and bereavement care following stillbirth in LMIC.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Support for parents and families after stillbirth and neonatal death.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Swedish massage as an adjunct approach to Help suppOrt individuals Pregnant after Experiencing a prior Stillbirth (HOPES): a convergent parallel mixed-methods single-arm feasibility trial protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- 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
27 authors at 17 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStillbirth is associated with significant physical, psychosocial and economic consequences for parents, families, wider society and the healthcare system. There is emerging momentum to design and evaluate interventions for care after stillbirth and in subsequent pregnancies. However, there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice compounded by inconsistent outcome reporting in research studies. To address this paucity of evidence, we plan to develop a core outcome set for stillbirth care research, through an international consensus process with key stakeholders including parents, healthcare professionals and researchers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The development of this core outcome set will be divided into five distinct phases: (1) Identifying potential outcomes from a mixed-methods systematic review and analysis of interviews with parents who have experienced stillbirth; (2) Creating a comprehensive outcome long-list and piloting of a Delphi questionnaire using think-aloud interviews; (3) Choosing the most important outcomes by conducting an international two-round Delphi survey including high-income, middle-income and low-income countries; (4) Deciding the core outcome set by consensus meetings with key stakeholders and (5) Dissemination and promotion of the core outcome set. A parent and public involvement panel and international steering committee has been convened to coproduce every stage of the development of this core outcome set. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the qualitative interviews has been approved by Berkshire Ethics Committee REC Reference 12/SC/0495. Ethical approval for the think-aloud interviews, Delphi survey and consensus meetings has been awarded from the University of Bristol Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: 116535). The dissemination strategy is being developed with the parent and public involvement panel and steering committee. Results will be published in peer-reviewed specialty journals, shared at national and international conferences and promoted through parent organisations and charities. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018087748.
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.