ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Can benchmarking uncover the disparities in the perinatal dashboard and improve the quality of care that pregnant women of diverse ethnic backgrounds receive? A retrospective cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Moving beyond good intentions: a qualitative study exploring healthcare professionals' perspectives on delivering equitable prenatal testing in the English NHS.International journal for equity in health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates the impact of including ethnicity and English proficiency (EP) in the local perinatal dashboard to uncover outcome differences faced by pregnant women from diverse ethnic backgrounds.
designA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the University Hospitals of Leicester between September 2020 and December 2020, including 2862 singleton pregnancies at booking and 2407 deliveries. Data from the maternity server covered demographics and key performance indicators (KPIs), such as gestational age at booking, uptake of first trimester screening test (FTST), perinatal outcome, third- and fourth-degree perineal tears and post-partum haemorrhage (PPH). The NHS perinatal surveillance dashboard categorised these KPIs by ethnicity and EP.
resultsThe booking cohort comprised 62% White, 26% Asian, 3% Black, 2% mixed race and 2.5% any other ethnic group. Late antenatal booking was highest in the mixed-race cohort (15%). Women who do not speak English as their first language (NEPL) were the largest undecided group with the FTST uptake (10%). Among the delivery group, mixed-race women had a higher stillbirth rate (21.28 per 1000 live births) and preterm births (10%). Third- and fourth-degree tear rates were highest among ethnic minority-NEPL cohorts (4.36%), although they were not statistically significant. No significant differences were observed in PPH rates.
conclusionsThis study highlights perinatal disparities among diverse ethnic groups and non-English-speaking women, necessitating targeted interventions to address these inequities for better perinatal outcomes for diverse populations. Including ethnicity and EP in perinatal dashboards reveals these disparities and aids in developing quality assurance systems to monitor and address them.
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.