Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40200723›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025

Family Interviews Improve Health Service Recommendations in Mortality Review Process: A Mixed-Methods Assessment.

Catherine Kothari, Fernando Ospina, Nia Evans, Cynthia Bane, Joi Presberry Dixon, Vaishali Patil, Ruth Butters, Rosemary Fournier, Susanna C Joy, Brenda O'Rourke and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Catherine KothariDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8072-8920
Fernando OspinaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Nia EvansDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Cynthia BaneDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Joi Presberry DixonDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Vaishali PatilDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Ruth ButtersDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Rosemary FournierNational Center for Fatality Review and Prevention, Okemos, Michigan, USA.
Susanna C JoyNational Center for Fatality Review and Prevention, Okemos, Michigan, USA.
Brenda O'RourkeKalamazoo County Health and Community Services, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Josephine WoodsNAACP Kalamazoo Branch, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Debra LenzKalamazoo County Health and Community Services, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Aaron L DaviesBronson Medical Group, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.

Funding

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement Number UG7MC28482 from the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) as part of an award totalling $5,149,996 annually with 0% financed with nongovernmental sources. The Kalamazoo County MI FIMR project, itself, as well as manuscript preparation, was supported by Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, United Way of Southwest Michigan, and the Stryker Johnston Foundation.US Department of Health and Human Services UG7MC28482
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the United States, although there is strong motivation for incorporating family interviews into Fetal Infant Mortality Reviews (FIMR) and important potential for expanding it to other types of reviews, there is limited evidence that family interviews make a difference in review team outcomes.

objectiveThis study aims to assess the impact of FIMR family interviews identifying health service gaps and generating actionable improvements.

designMixed methods design with quantitative case-control analysis and qualitative semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data collection was secondary analysis of FIMR administrative records, comparing outcomes with and without family interviews using Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) and descriptive analysis of annual FIMR team evaluation responses. Qualitative data collection included audio-taping, transcribing and consensus coding of semi-structured interviews. SETTING AND

participantsThe quantitative setting was Kalamazoo County, Michigan, FIMR reviews from 2015 to 2023, whereas the qualitative setting was virtual. Quantitative sample was the full population of completed FIMR case reviews (N = 158), and the 15 FIMR team case reviewers completing the 2023 annual evaluation. The qualitative sample was a purposive sample of 28 FIMR administrators across the United States.

main outcome measuresQuantitative outcomes were review-identified contributing stressors and subsequent recommendations generated in the case review process. Qualitative outcomes were thematic experiences of family interview implementation and impact within mortality review process.

resultsThe 53 cases (34%) with family interviews were similar to the 105 (66%) non-interview cases regarding multipleperinatal characteristics and were different regarding death type and manner. Controlling for these differences, GEE analysis found that family interviews were associated with increased identification of stressors, especially medical and socioeconomic, with a 2.6 increase in the number of stressors identified (aOR = 2.6, 95% CI: 1.5-4.7, p < 0.001). Family interviews were associated with a 40% increase in recommendations generated (aOR = 1.4, 95% CI: 1.0-2.0, p = 0.05), especially regarding patient-provider communication. Two-thirds of the FIMR team reported that family interviews were 'Very Impactful' in making meaningful system changes. Qualitatively, three primary themes emerged: Hurdles to Getting Interviews, Completing the Picture and Bringing the Human Connection.

conclusionsThis study drew upon multiple types of data, documenting the challenges obtaining interviews, while emphasizing their value identifying root causes, producing actionable healthcare service recommendations and motivating action. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Locally, members of community advocate organizations representing birthing and parenting individuals and those representing people identifying as Black race contributed by actively refining the implementation of FIMR family interviews, including how interview information was utilized in FIMR case review meetings (study interventions). Mock FIMR case review meetings conducted as part of United Way public 'bus tours' and with undergraduate/graduate university students further refined recommendations coding and dissemination strategies. Leadership from public and private health service organizations shared the facilitators and barriers for applying FIMR recommendations to institutional policy and practice (shaping the development of recommendations coding as well as dissemination and interpretation of study findings). Nationally, a network of mortality review funders and administrators, in a 4-year learning series convened by the National Center for Fatality Prevention and Review, provided input in centreing family interviews within different types of mortality review processes (influencing study objectives, qualitative interview structure and results interpretation). Additionally, US policy leaders in maternal child health and health equity provided historical and current context for FIMR family interview funding and enabling legislation (informing the interpretation of study results and specifically referenced within the manuscript).

Indexed as

FamilyInfant MortalityInterviews as TopicCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansInfantMichiganQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementUnited Statescommunity and patient engagementhealth services improvementpopulation health

Identifiers

PMID40200723
PMCPMC11979358

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.