Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39953454›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025

Women's health and healthcare experiences in the years after gestational diabetes or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.

Bec Jenkinson, Valerie Charlton, Leah Hardiman, Ayme Limmer, Melanie McKenzie, Anna-Lee Ura, Carissa Bonner, Sheleigh Lawler, Philippa Middleton, Gita Mishra and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. 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. The Bleeding Disorders Research Collaborative.Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis · 2025
    Review
  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

11 authors.

Bec JenkinsonSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. r.jenkinson@uq.edu.au.
Valerie CharltonAustralian Action on Pre-Eclampsia, Central Coast, Australia.
Leah HardimanConsumer Representative, Brisbane, Australia.
Ayme LimmerConsumer Representative, Brisbane, Australia.
Melanie McKenzieHarrison's Little Wings, Brisbane, Australia.
Anna-Lee UraAustralasian Birth Trama Association, Gold Coast, Australia.
Carissa BonnerSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Sheleigh LawlerSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Philippa MiddletonSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia.
Gita MishraSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Jenny DoustSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1153420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnancy complications, such as gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), affect a significant proportion of women in Australia, with long-term implications for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Despite existing preventive measures, participation in ongoing health monitoring remains low. This study aims to explore women's preferences and experiences regarding preventive healthcare after GDM and HDP, and to identify their unanswered questions about the association between these conditions and future CVD risk.

methodsA participatory, qualitative approach was adopted, involving a Lived Experience Expert Group (LEE Group) to plan, conduct, and interpret focus groups with women who had experienced either GDM or HDP. Participants were recruited through health consumer and community organisations and took part in two focus groups conducted via Zoom. The focus groups involved a stimulus presentation about CVD and GDM or HDP, facilitated group discussion about participants' health and healthcare since their pregnancy, and Nominal Group Technique to prioritise participants' questions about their CVD risk. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcripts from each group were analysed thematically. Synthesised Member Checking was used to verify the trustworthiness of findings.

resultsTwelve women participated in the focus groups, with distinct themes emerging from the GDM and HDP focus groups. Participants were previously unaware of the association between their pregnancy complication and increased risk of future CVD and wished to know more. Three themes were generated from the GDM focus groups: 'a distressing diagnosis'; 'degrees of diabetes'; and 'balancing motherhood and self-care'. Two themes were generated from the HDP focus groups: 'women's concerns were dismissed' and 'wanting follow up at the right time and with the right person'. The 'top ten' questions from each group focussed on improving maternity care, preventing CVD, and (for the HDP group) concerns beyond CVD.

conclusionsWomen's capacity to engage in preventive health after GDM and HDP is influenced by their maternity care experiences and the accessibility of primary care pathways. Future interventions should focus on improving woman-centred maternity care, ensuring seamless transitions to primary care, and addressing the social determinants of health for new mothers.

Indexed as

Diabetes, GestationalHypertension, Pregnancy-InducedWomen's HealthAdultAustraliaCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleFocus GroupsHumansPregnancyQualitative ResearchCardiovascular diseasesDiabetesFocus groupsGestationalHypertensionPregnancy-inducedPreventive health servicesQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID39953454
PMCPMC11827438

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.