Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42342399›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2026

Effectiveness of peer support interventions to improve mental health outcomes after miscarriage: a systematic review and call for high-quality evidence.

Leanne Burton, Juanita Charles, Mary Gemma Cherry, Rhiannon Corcoran, Shaima Hassan, Ruaraidh Hill, Sarah Little, Michelle Maden, Helen Mulholland, Elizabeth Perkins and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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

13 authors.

Leanne BurtonDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK l.r.burton@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5870-4161
Juanita CharlesThe Miscarriage Association, Wakefield, UK.
Mary Gemma CherryDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Rhiannon CorcoranDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Shaima HassanDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Ruaraidh HillLiverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Department of Health Data Science, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Sarah LittleIndependent Researcher (Public Advisor), Merseyside, UK.
Michelle MadenLiverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Department of Health Data Science, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Helen MulhollandDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Elizabeth PerkinsDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Pauline SladeDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Selina WallisDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Paul MarshallDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPeer support is being integrated into the new maternal mental health services in England to further the development of the recovery approach in relation to loss. Psychological support after miscarriage (pregnancy loss prior to viability) is often overlooked, despite significant psychological morbidity. This systematic review explored the effectiveness of peer support interventions to improve mental health outcomes after miscarriage.

designSystematic review DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive systematic search across nine databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science (all databases), EMBASE, CENTRAL, LENS.org, British Nursing Index and Health Management Information Consortium) was conducted in June 2025. Grey literature was identified through website searching, contact with topic experts and a national call for evidence. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Study designs with a quantitative evaluative component or mixed-methods studies reporting effectiveness were eligible if they involved women and/or partners who had experienced miscarriage and been offered a peer support intervention. Any peer support versus control (no treatment, wait list and usual care) or peer support versus another psychosocial intervention was eligible for inclusion. Studies that report any of the following broad groups of outcomes (whether validated measures or by self-report) were eligible for inclusion: (a) personal recovery, (b) mental health recovery, (c) health service use and (d) social outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search and screen for eligible studies.

resultsOf the 4342 titles screened, 100 potentially relevant full-text papers were retrieved and screened resulting in seven randomised controlled trials and two controlled trials identified across 10 papers. Of these, seven did not evaluate a peer-led intervention, one reported only on women who had experienced pregnancy loss later than 24 weeks gestation, and one reported a peer support intervention for those who experienced pregnancy loss at any age of gestation but did not disaggregate data for those who experienced miscarriage. Thus, no studies were eligible for inclusion. This indicates a significant gap in the current literature. The inconsistencies and limitations in existing research approaches are explored in detail.

conclusionsThis systematic review has identified an evidence gap as there is currently no robust evidence for the effectiveness of peer support interventions after miscarriage. Given the drive for the inclusion of peer support in new maternal mental health services, there is therefore a need for targeted intervention research to provide reliable evidence to determine effective peer support interventions for this population. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024518248.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousMental HealthPeer GroupSocial SupportEvidence GapsFemaleHumansMental Health ServicesPregnancyHealth ServicesMENTAL HEALTHPostpartum WomenPregnancyPsychosocial Intervention

Identifiers

PMID42342399
PMCPMC13295866

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.