Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41922055›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Maternal socioeconomic status and neonatal mortality in OECD countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Samira Saberian, Natalie Gallagher, Michelle Maden, Gillian Maudsley, Oluwaseun B Esan, Sandra Djoumessi Tonle, Michael Madden, Chris Gale, Nim Subhedar, Ian Sinha and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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

12 authors.

Samira SaberianPublic Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK saberian@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-3223-9496
Natalie GallagherLiverpool Women's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Michelle MadenLiverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Gillian MaudsleyPublic Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Oluwaseun B EsanPublic Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Sandra Djoumessi TonleUniversity of Liverpool School of Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Michael MaddenUniversity of Liverpool School of Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Chris GaleNeonatal Medicine and Centre for Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0707-876X
Nim SubhedarLiverpool Women's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Ian SinhaAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Daniela K Schlüter *Public Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
David Taylor-Robinson *Public Health, Policy and Systems, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSocioeconomic inequalities in neonatal mortality are observed globally but gaps remain in the evidence from current reviews, specifically: a wider range of socioeconomic indicators at the individual, household and area level than previous reviews, and alternative time frames to define neonatal mortality. Thus, a comprehensive updated review of the literature is required, focusing on multiple measures of socioeconomic status and alternative time frames, to assess the relationship between maternal socioeconomic status and neonatal mortality in high-income countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Three different search approaches will be used: electronic searching of three databases, grey literature searching and reference list checking. First, the three databases Medline, Scopus and Web of Science will be searched using relevant synonyms and adapted terms from medical subject heading terms (MeSH) in Medline for maternal socioeconomic status and neonatal mortality identified from previous systematic reviews on inequalities in adverse pregnancy outcomes. Second, grey literature will be searched by entering the relevant terms into Google. Title, abstract and full text screening will be conducted by the review team against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, with at least 10% checked by a second reviewer to assess for any bias and errors. We will also conduct the kappa statistic for inter-rater reliability. Third, the reference lists of included studies will be reviewed for any additional studies that meet the criteria. Data will be extracted using a data extraction form and extracted studies will be assessed using the Liverpool Quality Assessment Tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted and, where appropriate, meta-analysis will be performed. If the data allow, subgroup analysis by neonatal care population and specific gestational ages will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as all studies in this systematic review will be publicly available. The findings of this review will be presented at conferences and disseminated in peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022315407.

Indexed as

Developed CountriesInfant MortalitySocial ClassFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMeta-Analysis as TopicOrganisation for Economic Co-Operation and DevelopmentPregnancyResearch DesignSocioeconomic Disparities in HealthSystematic Reviews as Topicmaternal socioeconomic statusneonatal mortalitysocioeconomic inequalities

Identifiers

PMID41922055
PMCPMC13052793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.