ArticleBMJ global health2025
Identifying and assessing the capacity and experience of trial sites in low- and middle-income countries for high-quality randomised drug trials in maternal and perinatal health.
Article in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A literature review and reflection on clinical trials: current challenges, future directions, and potential strategies to overcome practical barriers.AME clinical trials review · 2026Article
- Determinants of off-label drug acceptance in pregnancy: insights from an extended UTAUT model.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Existing international consortia for drug trials in maternal and perinatal health have focused largely on pragmatic trials using off-label medicines. This study aimed to identify and assess the capacity and experience of sites in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) for conducting trials for regulatory approval of medicines for pregnancy-related conditions. We systematically reviewed site assessment checklists across any disease area to develop a maternal trial site assessment checklist. The checklist was pretested, revised and used to collect data from trial sites in LMICs. Sites were systematically identified from a scoping review of maternal trials conducted in LMICs, known networks and snowball searching. Data reported by sites were verified against publicly accessible sources (clinical trial registries and published articles). We contacted 106 sites in 30 countries, of which 49 (46.2%) sites in 21 countries completed the checklist. Sites were from five regions-Sub-Saharan Africa (37), South Asia (6), Latin America and the Caribbean (4), Middle East and North Africa (1) and East Asia and the Pacific (1). More than 70% of responding sites had the requisite physical infrastructure, clinical and research staff, ethics, participant recruitment and data management services to conduct randomised trials. Respondents collectively identified 52 completed, ongoing or planned maternal trials across their sites. Of these 52 trials, 16 (30.8%) were Good Clinical Practice-compliant, 22 (42.3%) were phase III and one was a regulatory trial. 14 trials were conducted by a collaborative group established mostly for a specific trial or a small group of related trials. Only two of these groups were pre-established trial networks. While there is some capacity to conduct high-quality maternal drug trials in LMICs, effective research collaborations are needed to further strengthen and expand this capacity. Establishing a sustainable LMIC-based trial network will accelerate the development and testing of novel drugs to improve maternal and newborn health outcomes in these regions.
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.