Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41041820›Full record

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

Authentic Consumer-Clinician Co-Design of a Labour and Childbirth Intervention to Optimise Maternal Hydration in Labour: Reaching Consensus to Enhance Rigour.

Lauren Kearney, Bec Jenkinson, Christoph Lehner, Victoria Eley, Nicole Marsh, Deanne August, Susan de Jersey, Nigel Lee

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Authentic Consumer-Clinician Co-Design of a Labour and Childbirth Intervention to Optimise Maternal Hydration in Labour: Reaching Consensus to Enhance Rigour.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    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

8 authors.

Lauren KearneyThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0299-6537
Bec JenkinsonThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6723-8898
Christoph LehnerThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8466-0273
Victoria EleyThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Nicole MarshThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5779-1304
Deanne AugustThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7204-7065
Susan de JerseyThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Nigel LeeThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7350-5574

Funding

This study was funded through a competitive, investigator-led, research grant through the Study, Research and Education Fund, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMedical interventions during labour and childbirth have rarely been designed with end-users, including frontline clinicians and consumers of maternity care. This has resulted in difficulties in evidence uptake, translation and acceptability by those who it is designed to help. Diverse views of 'what is best' in research interventions and approaches exist, yet arguably, if consensus can be reached, more rigorous and acceptable interventions will ensue. One such area of uncertainty is hydration management in induced labour, with an increasing reliance on intravenous therapy, without high-quality evidence pervasive across maternity settings. Therefore, we aimed to co-design a labour and childbirth intervention to optimise maternal physiology during labour, through evidence synthesis, consumer survey and a consensus-generating activity.

methodsA multi-modal, intervention co-design study was undertaken. This involved three key stages: evidence-synthesis, consumer-survey and then a modified nominal group technique workshop to reach consensus on the intervention design. The whole process took place between April and November, 2023 in South-East Queensland, Australia.

resultsIn total, 96 completed responses were returned in the consumer survey, detailing women's preferences for hydration management during induced labour. This informed a Nominal Group Technique Workshop, inclusive of consumers, midwives, obstetricians, lactation consultants, dietitians, clinical trialists, neonatologists and nurses. Following robust discussion and various viewpoints presented, the expert reference group decided to support an approach whereby women would self-determine their own intake during induced labour and that the routine administration of intravenous fluids as a 'side-line' (current 'standard practice') to the synthetic oxytocin (labour hormone) infusion for induction of labour would not be routinely administered. In order to provide information/education to women on how best to optimise their hydration, a co-designed information brochure was developed.

conclusionWhat clinicians and researchers may assume is important as interventions and outcomes in a clinical trial may not always align with the opinions and lived experience of consumers. Incorporating co-design into trial protocol development has the potential to improve the relevance of research to the target population. This in turn may improve trial feasibility through enhanced recruitment, intervention and treatment adherence, and fidelity. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with lived experience (inclusive of both first-time mothers who had recently experienced a labour induction; and two maternity consumers involved in advocacy and research work to optimise labour and birth care) were involved in several parts of this study. This included study conceptualisation, data collection and analysis, interpretation and authorship of manuscript.

Indexed as

Fluid TherapyLabor, InducedLabor, ObstetricParturitionAdultConsensusFemaleHumansPregnancyQueenslandResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41041820
PMCPMC12492067

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.