Research priorities of women at risk for preterm birth: findings and a call to action.
Health disparities
Lived experience
Patient and public involvement
Pregnancy, preterm birth
Research justice
Research priority setting
Women of color
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Jan 2020
13 Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
15
08
2019
accepted:
06
12
2019
entrez:
14
1
2020
pubmed:
14
1
2020
medline:
24
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Traditional hierarchical approaches to research give privilege to small groups with decision-making power, without direct input from those with lived experience of illness who bear the burden of disease. A Research Justice framework values the expertise of patients and communities as well as their power in creating knowledge and in decisions about what research is conducted. Preterm birth has persisted at epidemic levels in the United States for decades and disproportionately affects women of color, especially Black women. Women of color have not been included in setting the agenda regarding preterm birth research. We used the Research Priorities of Affected Communities protocol to elicit and prioritize potential research questions and topics directly from women of color living in three communities that experience disproportionately high rates of preterm birth. Women participated in two focus group sessions, first describing their healthcare experiences and generating lists of uncertainties about their health and/or healthcare during pregnancy. Women then participated in consensus activities to achieve 'top-priority' research questions and topic lists. The priority research questions and topics produced by each group were examined within and across the three regions for similarities and differences. Fifty-four women participated in seven groups (14 sessions) and generated 375 researchable questions, clustered within 22 topics and four overarching themes: Maternal Health and Care Before, During, and After Pregnancy; Newborn Health and Care of the Preterm Baby; Understanding Stress and Interventions to Prevent or Reduce Stress; and Interpersonal and Structural Health Inequities. The questions and topics represent a wide range of research domains, from basic science, translational, clinical, health and social care delivery to policy and economic research. There were many similarities and some unique differences in the questions, topics and priorities across the regions. These findings can be used to design and fund research addressing unanswered questions that matter most to women at high risk for preterm birth. Investigators and funders are strongly encouraged to incorporate women at the front lines of the preterm birth epidemic in research design and funding decisions, and more broadly, to advance methods to deepen healthcare research partnerships with affected communities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Traditional hierarchical approaches to research give privilege to small groups with decision-making power, without direct input from those with lived experience of illness who bear the burden of disease. A Research Justice framework values the expertise of patients and communities as well as their power in creating knowledge and in decisions about what research is conducted. Preterm birth has persisted at epidemic levels in the United States for decades and disproportionately affects women of color, especially Black women. Women of color have not been included in setting the agenda regarding preterm birth research.
METHODS
METHODS
We used the Research Priorities of Affected Communities protocol to elicit and prioritize potential research questions and topics directly from women of color living in three communities that experience disproportionately high rates of preterm birth. Women participated in two focus group sessions, first describing their healthcare experiences and generating lists of uncertainties about their health and/or healthcare during pregnancy. Women then participated in consensus activities to achieve 'top-priority' research questions and topic lists. The priority research questions and topics produced by each group were examined within and across the three regions for similarities and differences.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Fifty-four women participated in seven groups (14 sessions) and generated 375 researchable questions, clustered within 22 topics and four overarching themes: Maternal Health and Care Before, During, and After Pregnancy; Newborn Health and Care of the Preterm Baby; Understanding Stress and Interventions to Prevent or Reduce Stress; and Interpersonal and Structural Health Inequities. The questions and topics represent a wide range of research domains, from basic science, translational, clinical, health and social care delivery to policy and economic research. There were many similarities and some unique differences in the questions, topics and priorities across the regions.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
These findings can be used to design and fund research addressing unanswered questions that matter most to women at high risk for preterm birth. Investigators and funders are strongly encouraged to incorporate women at the front lines of the preterm birth epidemic in research design and funding decisions, and more broadly, to advance methods to deepen healthcare research partnerships with affected communities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31928534
doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2664-1
pii: 10.1186/s12884-019-2664-1
pmc: PMC6956492
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
10Références
Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Mar;38(3):359-367
pubmed: 30830822
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2018 Dec;60(12):1278-1284
pubmed: 30132826
Pediatrics. 2017 Jul;140(1):null
pubmed: 28759410
J Comp Eff Res. 2015 Mar;4(2):133-45
pubmed: 25825842
Qual Life Res. 2015 May;24(5):1033-41
pubmed: 25560774
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Jan-Mar;8(1):1-10
pubmed: 28949867
Matern Child Health J. 2015 Jun;19(6):1276-83
pubmed: 25404405
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2018 Nov;67(8):1-50
pubmed: 30707672
Fam Pract. 2017 Jun 1;34(3):278-284
pubmed: 27677298
SSM Popul Health. 2019 Feb 28;7:100362
pubmed: 30899773
J Comp Eff Res. 2013 May;2(3):313-24
pubmed: 24236630
JAMA. 2015 Dec 1;314(21):2235-6
pubmed: 26595059
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019 May;236:224-239
pubmed: 30772047
Health Expect. 2019 Jun;22(3):307-316
pubmed: 30761699
J Vis Exp. 2018 Jan 12;(131):
pubmed: 29364217
Qual Health Res. 2016 Jan;26(1):117-35
pubmed: 25361792
Am J Perinatol. 2019 Sep 03;:null
pubmed: 31480082
Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2018 Dec 12;4:25
pubmed: 30564431
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89
pubmed: 24568690
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Mar;201:127-135
pubmed: 29494846
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Aug;25(8):626-32
pubmed: 26993640
PLoS One. 2016 Sep 13;11(9):e0162506
pubmed: 27622562
BMJ. 2018 Dec 6;363:k5147
pubmed: 30522999
AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2015 Jul;29(7):389-99
pubmed: 26061668
PLoS Med. 2017 Sep 26;14(9):e1002391
pubmed: 28949963
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Nov;130(5):e251-e269
pubmed: 29064972
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Dec;29(12):1692-701
pubmed: 24893581
J Hosp Med. 2015 May;10(5):318-27
pubmed: 25877486
BMJ Open. 2015 Jan 28;5(1):e006233
pubmed: 25631309
Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50
pubmed: 22809132
Birth. 2018 Sep;45(3):222-231
pubmed: 29926965
J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2019 Jan 9;:1-9
pubmed: 30624142