ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2026
Pre-eclampsia risk-stratified planned birth at term: A survey of women's perspectives on acceptability and risk communication.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2026. 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.
- Healthcare professionals' perceptions of the acceptability of the PREVENT-PE trial: A mixed-methods survey and interview study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPre-eclampsia (PE) remains a major complication of pregnancies, globally, and while there is no intervention proven to be effective in decreasing late preterm and term PE; the PREVENT-PE trial aimed to evaluate whether the intervention-a strategy of screening for PE risk at 35-36 weeks' gestation, and for a risk of ≥1-in-50, offering risk-stratified, planned early term birth-could reduce the incidence of subsequent PE, compared with usual care. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe aimed to evaluate the acceptability of trial participation and risk communication for women participating in The PREVENT-PE trial [ISRCTN41632964] in the United Kingdom. From March to October 2024, trial participants were invited, antenatally and/or postnatally, to complete an online survey, and acceptability and risk communication measures were compared by trial arm.
resultsOf those accessing the survey, 257 out of 478 (48.2%) were antenatal (median 35.4 weeks' gestation), and 485 out of 1617 (30.0%) were postnatal (median 25.6 weeks postnatally) respondents who were eligible. Antenatally, and by trial arm: (i) most women felt: comfortable with the trial (>70%); participation required little/no effort (>75%; 77.9% [intervention] vs. 91.7% [control], p = 0.05); confident in participation (>75%); the trial was acceptable (≈90%); and PE risk screening was fair (>90%), could reduce chances of becoming seriously ill (>90%), and understood how that could be achieved (>90%); (ii) half disagreed that timed birth for PE would interfere with competing priorities, although 20-30% agreed; (iii) ≥80% of participants felt listened to, were able to ask questions and receive helpful answers, had their preferences considered, had clear on the situation being discussed, and were confident about their decision; and (iv) ≈50% were uncertain about what was going to happen. Postnatally, views were more neutral, without an increase in negativity.
conclusionsFindings indicate that women find third-trimester screening for PE and risk-stratified planned early term birth highly acceptable, understand those risks, and the potential to favorably impact their pregnancy outcome.
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.