ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2025
'I Am Not Going, So You're Doing It': Management of Pregnant People With High BMI at Rural Hospitals in British Columbia: A Mixed Methods Analysis.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 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.
- 'I Am Not Going, So You're Doing It': Management of Pregnant People With High BMI at Rural Hospitals in British Columbia: A Mixed Methods Analysis.The Australian journal of rural health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo summarise administrative and interview data relevant to the care of pregnant people with high BMI in rural British Columbia.
methodsIn this mixed methods analysis, we report administrative health data linked to maternal postal codes, to determine variations in rates of local births across BMI groups (n = 3247) and to examine associations between BMI and adverse maternal-newborn outcomes (n = 2527). Qualitative data from 169 healthcare providers and administrators at rural hospitals in BC were analyzed to understand rural providers' experiences when caring for pregnant women with high BMI. Two clinical guidelines that were developed to improve care for women with obesity are presented, as examples of rural CQI initiatives.
resultsThe proportion of local births decreased as BMI increased: 72.7% of those with normal BMI gave birth at rural hospitals compared to 34.9% with a BMI ≥ 40. For underweight, overweight, and obese women who gave birth at rural hospitals, the incidence of adverse perinatal outcomes was higher (IRR 1.85; 95% CI: 0.49-3.76, IRR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.74-1.80; IRR = 1.81; 95% CI: 0.87-3.35), compared to those in the normal BMI range, but the associations were not significant. Healthcare providers also described challenges with maintaining quality and safety when caring for patients with high BMI in a low-volume rural setting and noted that a specialist 'cookie cutter' approach to managing and transferring people with high BMI was not practical in rural communities. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionStrategies that improve the care of pregnant women with high BMI must take into account the social risks incurred by birthers and families who leave the community alongside the clinical risks of remaining, with attention also given to the impact of adverse outcomes on health care providers. These processes must be underscored by engagement from regional referral specialists to ensure local providers are clinically supported and that there are efficient transfer pathways to higher levels of care should this be needed.
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.