ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Clinician continuity during pregnancy care: A mixed methods study.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To measure clinician continuity during pregnancy care and contextualize the findings with patient experiences of clinician continuity and their influence on trust-building. Methods: We conducted a convergent mixed methods study that examined the number of clinicians seen for all patients who gave birth at a large academic medical center between June 2023 and May 2024. Statistical analyses were performed across demographic subgroups with number of clinicians seen during pregnancy care as the primary outcome and the proportion of visits with the most frequently seen clinician as the secondary outcome. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to control for covariates. Purposive sampling was used to select a subset of English- and Spanish-speaking patients for semi-structured interviews. Participants completed a short sociodemographic survey and interviews exploring perceptions of clinical continuity, factors that build or erode trust, and patients' recommendations for pregnancy care. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using content analysis. Two researchers met to iteratively refine the codebook, discuss discrepancies, and reach consensus. Results: We identified 2395 patients with eligible visits for the retrospective cohort. Total visits ranged from two to 38 (median 13, interquartile range [IQR] 10-15) with a median of 4 clinicians seen during pregnancy (IQR 3-5). Participants in the resident practice and hospital-based maternal-fetal medicine practice saw more clinicians (7, IQR 6-9 and 5, IQR 3-7, respectively; Conclusion: Clinician continuity during outpatient pregnancy care varied by clinician type, practice, clinical site, and patient factors. Participants highly valued continuity of care, which was associated with greater trust and improved care experiences.
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.