Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38814991›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2024

Factors influencing the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials: A mixed-methods systematic review.

Mridula Shankar, Alya Hazfiarini, Rana Islamiah Zahroh, Joshua P Vogel, Annie R A McDougall, Patrick Condron, Shivaprasad S Goudar, Yeshita V Pujar, Manjunath S Somannavar, Umesh Charantimath and 4 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Research on Preterm Birth Prevention: The Participant Experience.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

14 authors.

Mridula ShankarGender and Women's Health Unit, Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4652-6396
Alya HazfiariniGender and Women's Health Unit, Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Rana Islamiah ZahrohGender and Women's Health Unit, Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7831-2336
Joshua P VogelMaternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3214-7096
Annie R A McDougallMaternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1182-6679
Patrick CondronUniversity Library, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5681-8328
Shivaprasad S GoudarWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8680-7053
Yeshita V PujarWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-7420-9849
Manjunath S SomannavarWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8871-5072
Umesh CharantimathWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0003-1726-2798
Anne AmmerdorfferConcept Foundation, Geneva, Switzerland/Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-1059-061X
Sara RushwanConcept Foundation, Geneva, Switzerland/Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-2538-4955
A Metin GülmezogluConcept Foundation, Geneva, Switzerland/Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4674-0998
Meghan A BohrenGender and Women's Health Unit, Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4179-4682

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor representation of pregnant and lactating women and people in clinical trials has marginalised their health concerns and denied the maternal-fetal/infant dyad benefits of innovation in therapeutic research and development. This mixed-methods systematic review synthesised factors affecting the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials, across all levels of the research ecosystem. METHODS AND

findingsWe searched 8 databases from inception to 14 February 2024 to identify qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies that described factors affecting participation of pregnant and lactating women in vaccine and therapeutic clinical trials in any setting. We used thematic synthesis to analyse the qualitative literature and assessed confidence in each qualitative review finding using the GRADE-CERQual approach. We compared quantitative data against the thematic synthesis findings to assess areas of convergence or divergence. We mapped review findings to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B) to inform future development of behaviour change strategies. We included 60 papers from 27 countries. We grouped 24 review findings under 5 overarching themes: (a) interplay between perceived risks and benefits of participation in women's decision-making; (b) engagement between women and the medical and research ecosystems; (c) gender norms and decision-making autonomy; (d) factors affecting clinical trial recruitment; and (e) upstream factors in the research ecosystem. Women's willingness to participate in trials was affected by: perceived risk of the health condition weighed against an intervention's risks and benefits, therapeutic optimism, intervention acceptability, expectations of receiving higher quality care in a trial, altruistic motivations, intimate relationship dynamics, and power and trust in medicine and research. Health workers supported women's participation in trials when they perceived clinical equipoise, had hope for novel therapeutic applications, and were convinced an intervention was safe. For research staff, developing reciprocal relationships with health workers, having access to resources for trial implementation, ensuring the trial was visible to potential participants and health workers, implementing a woman-centred approach when communicating with potential participants, and emotional orientations towards the trial were factors perceived to affect recruitment. For study investigators and ethics committees, the complexities and subjectivities in risk assessments and trial design, and limited funding of such trials contributed to their reluctance in leading and approving such trials. All included studies focused on factors affecting participation of cisgender pregnant women in clinical trials; future research should consider other pregnancy-capable populations, including transgender and nonbinary people.

conclusionsThis systematic review highlights diverse factors across multiple levels and stakeholders affecting the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials. By linking identified factors to frameworks of behaviour change, we have developed theoretically informed strategies that can help optimise pregnant and lactating women's engagement, participation, and trust in such trials.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicLactationPatient ParticipationPregnant PeopleDecision MakingFemaleHumansMotivationPatient SelectionPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID38814991
PMCPMC11139290

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.