Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41975065›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026

From participants to partners: a strategy for establishing a national consumer fellow to lead the co-design of maternity patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

Karen Schlage, Lauren C Spark, Emily J Callander, Emily Leefhelm, Zoe Bradfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2026. 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. 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

5 authors.

Karen SchlageSchool of Nursing, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia. karen.schlage@curtin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-3602-8202
Lauren C SparkSchool of Nursing, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Emily J CallanderSchool of Public Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Emily LeefhelmSchool of Nursing, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Zoe BradfieldSchool of Nursing, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient‑reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient‑reported outcome measures (PROMs) play an increasingly important role in assessing the quality and safety of healthcare. However, their application in maternity care is relatively contemporary, and progress is hindered by the absence of high‑quality, validated, maternity‑specific tools. In Australia, there are no nationally standardized maternity PREMs or PROMs capable of capturing whether care provided during the transformative period of childbearing aligns with the needs, expectations, and priorities of those giving birth. Without genuine consumer co‑design, current approaches to developing maternity PREMs and PROMs risk failing to capture the complexity and diversity of women’s experiences and outcomes. MAIN TEXT: The development of national consumer co-designed maternity PREMs and PROMs in Australia is a critical opportunity to ensure that which is measured, genuinely reflects what matters to women. Globally however, maternity care lacks validated PREMs and PROMs that have been meaningfully co‑designed with consumers. Addressing this gap requires intentional, rigorous co‑design grounded in five core principles: authentic consumer leadership; diverse and inclusive representation; iterative, continuous engagement; respectful and reciprocal partnership supported by equitable reimbursement; and alignment with best‑practice frameworks that safeguard against tokenism. Together, these principles underpin contemporary models of consumer involvement, including dedicated consumer leadership roles and structured advisory groups, to meaningfully embed lived experience to co-design maternity care PREMs and PROMs.

conclusionsA co-design approach that centers women as active partners, rather than passive participants, is essential for producing PREMs and PROMs that are relevant, acceptable and impactful in real-world maternity care. Rigorous, inclusive co‑design provides the foundation for measurement systems capable of driving meaningful and lasting improvements in the safety, quality, and person‑centeredness of maternity care.

Indexed as

Maternal Health ServicesMothersPatient ParticipationPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresStakeholder ParticipationAdvisory CommitteesAustraliaFemaleHumansLeadershipPregnancyQuality ImprovementCo-designConsumerMaternity care experiencesMaternity care outcomesMeasurement toolsPatient engagementPatient-reported measuresPREMsPROMs

Identifiers

PMID41975065
PMCPMC13201677

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.