Setting implementation research priorities to reduce preterm births and stillbirths at the community level.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: GAPPS Expert Group on Community Based Strategies and Constraints
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3014929 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Setting implementation research priorities to reduce preterm births and stillbirths at the community level.
George Asha A Young Mark M Bang Abhay A Chan Kit Yee KY Rudan Igor I Victora Cesar G CG Chopra Mickey M Rubens Craig C
PLoS medicine 20110104 1
Asha George and colleagues from the GAPPS group report the implementation research priorities to address prematurity and stillbirths at the community level that resulted from their recent expert consensus exercise. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIt is essential to embed patient and public perspectives into every stage of the research journey, including setting the future research agenda. The substantial gaps in our understanding of prematurity-associated lung disease presented a timely opportunity to determine the community's research priorities.ObjectiveTo conduct a priority setting partnership (PSP) to determine the top 10 research priorities for preterm lung health.DesignWe undertook a modified James Lind Alliance methodology comprising three main stages: (1) an idea generating survey with open questions to ascertain the community's most important ideas for future preterm lung health research, (2) prioritisation survey to distill the main themes into a shortlist of 20 and (3) consensus workshop where participants were tasked with ranking their final top 10. This PSP is reflective of the view of preterm-born individuals, parents of preterm children and healthcare professionals in an Australian healthcare setting.ResultsWe collated 144 submissions from the idea generating survey from which 27 prioritisation themes were developed. From the 150 prioritisation survey responses, the 20 themes receiving the most votes were taken to the consensus workshop. Participants identified the following top 10: (1) lifelong impacts; (2) interventions, treatments or supports; (3) ongoing lung health follow-up; (4) diagnostic tools, resources and education for primary healthcare providers; (5) resources to inform and empower families; (6) relationship to physical health and developmental issues; (7) preventing and/or treating lung infections; (8) additional supports, resources and research for minority groups; (9) impact on mental well-being; and (10) likelihood of asthma diagnosis.ConclusionPriorities identified through the PSP will be invaluable in informing future research into prematurity-associated lung disease.
| S-EPMC11795381 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025.MethodsWe used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.ResultsNine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.ConclusionThese findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.
| S-EPMC4576458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThis paper aims to identify health research priorities that could improve the rate of progress in reducing global neonatal mortality from preterm birth and low birth weight (PB/LBW), as set out in the UN's Millennium Development Goal 4.MethodsWe applied the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology for setting priorities in health research investments. In the process coordinated by the World Health Organization in 2007-2008, 21 researchers with interest in child, maternal and newborn health suggested 82 research ideas that spanned across the broad spectrum of epidemiological research, health policy and systems research, improvement of existing interventions and development of new interventions. The 82 research questions were then assessed for answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, maximum potential for mortality reduction and the effect on equity using the CHNRI method.ResultsThe top 10 identified research priorities were dominated by health systems and policy research questions (eg, identification of LBW infants born at home within 24-48 hours of birth for additional care; approaches to improve quality of care of LBW infants in health facilities; identification of barriers to optimal home care practices including care seeking; and approaches to increase the use of antenatal corticosteriods in preterm labor and to improve access to hospital care for LBW infants). These were followed by priorities for improvement of the existing interventions (eg, early initiation of breastfeeding, including feeding mode and techniques for those unable to suckle directly from the breast; improved cord care, such as chlorhexidine application; and alternative methods to Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) to keep LBW infants warm in community settings). The highest-ranked epidemiological question suggested improving criteria for identifying LBW infants who need to be cared for in a hospital. Among the new interventions, the greatest support was shown for the development of new simple and effective interventions for providing thermal care to LBW infants, if KMC is not acceptable to the mother.ConclusionThe context for this exercise was set within the MDG4, requiring an urgent and rapid progress in mortality reduction from low birth weight, rather than identifying long-term strategic solutions of the greatest potential. In a short-term context, the health policy and systems research to improve access and coverage by the existing interventions, coupled with further research to improve effectiveness, deliverability and acceptance of existing interventions, and epidemiological research to address the key gaps in knowledge, were all highlighted as research priorities.
| S-EPMC3484758 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3181228 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC2653551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn South Asia, where most stillbirths and neonatal deaths occur, much remains unknown about the causes of these deaths. About one-third of neonatal deaths are attributed to prematurity, yet the specific conditions which cause these deaths are often unclear as is the etiology of stillbirths. In low-resource settings, most women are not routinely tested for infections and autopsy is rare.MethodsThis prospective, cohort study will be conducted in hospitals in Davengere, India and Karachi, Pakistan. All women who deliver either a stillbirth or a preterm birth at one of the hospitals will be eligible for enrollment. With consent, the participant and, when applicable, her offspring, will be followed to 28-days post-delivery. A series of research tests will be conducted to determine infection and presence of other conditions which may contribute to the death. In addition, all routine clinical investigations will be documented. For both stillbirths and preterm neonates who die ≤ 28 days, with consent, a standard autopsy as well as minimally invasive tissue sampling will be conducted. Finally, an expert panel will review all available data for stillbirths and neonatal deaths to determine the primary and contributing causes of death using pre-specified guidance.ConclusionThis will be among the first studies to prospectively obtain detailed information on causes of stillbirth and preterm neonatal death in low-resource settings in Asia. Determining the primary causes of death will be important to inform strategies most likely to reduce the high mortality rates in South Asia.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03438110 ) Clinical Trial Registry of India ( CTRI/2018/03/012281 ).
| S-EPMC6020001 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3019109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Operational research (OR) is the discipline of using models, either quantitative or qualitative, to aid decision-making in complex implementation problems. The methods of OR have been used in healthcare since the 1950s in diverse areas such as emergency medicine and the interface between acute and community care; hospital performance; scheduling and management of patient home visits; scheduling of patient appointments; and many other complex implementation problems of an operational or logistical nature.To date, there has been limited debate about the role that operational research should take within implementation science. I detail three such roles for OR all grounded in upfront system thinking: structuring implementation problems, prospective evaluation of improvement interventions, and strategic reconfiguration. Case studies from mental health, emergency medicine, and stroke care are used to illustrate each role. I then describe the challenges for applied OR within implementation science at the organisational, interventional, and disciplinary levels. Two key challenges include the difficulty faced in achieving a position of mutual understanding between implementation scientists and research users and a stark lack of evaluation of OR interventions. To address these challenges, I propose a research agenda to evaluate applied OR through the lens of implementation science, the liberation of OR from the specialist research and consultancy environment, and co-design of models with service users. Operational research is a mature discipline that has developed a significant volume of methodology to improve health services. OR offers implementation scientists the opportunity to do more upfront system thinking before committing resources or taking risks. OR has three roles within implementation science: structuring an implementation problem, prospective evaluation of implementation problems, and a tool for strategic reconfiguration of health services. Challenges facing OR as implementation science include limited evidence and evaluation of impact, limited service user involvement, a lack of managerial awareness, effective communication between research users and OR modellers, and availability of healthcare data. To progress the science, a focus is needed in three key areas: evaluation of OR interventions, embedding the knowledge of OR in health services, and educating OR modellers about the aims and benefits of service user involvement.
| S-EPMC4895878 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a worsening of perinatal outcomes in many regions around the world. Melbourne, Australia, had one of the longest and most stringent lockdowns worldwide in 2020 while recording only rare instances of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the stillbirth and preterm birth rates in women who were exposed or unexposed to lockdown restrictions during pregnancy.Study designThis was a retrospective, multicenter cohort study of perinatal outcomes in Melbourne before and during the COVID-19 lockdown. The lockdown period was defined as the period from March 23, 2020 to March 14, 2021. Routinely-collected maternity data on singleton pregnancies ≥24 weeks gestation without congenital anomalies were obtained from all the 12 public hospitals in Melbourne. We defined the lockdown-exposed cohort as those women for whom weeks 20 to 40 of gestation occurred during the lockdown and the unexposed control group as women from the corresponding calendar periods 12 and 24 months before. The main outcome measures were stillbirth, preterm birth, fetal growth restriction (birthweight < third centile), and iatrogenic preterm birth for fetal compromise. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis to compare the odds of stillbirth, preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, and iatrogenic preterm birth for fetal compromise, adjusting for multiple covariates.ResultsThere were 24,817 births in the exposed group and 50,017 births in the control group. There was a significantly higher risk of preterm stillbirth in the exposed group than the control group (0.26% vs 0.18%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.05; P=.015). There was also a significant reduction in the preterm birth of live infants <37 weeks (5.68% vs 6.07%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.99; P=.02), which was largely mediated by a significant reduction in iatrogenic preterm birth (3.01% vs 3.27%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.99; P=.03), including iatrogenic preterm birth for fetal compromise (1.25% vs 1.51%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.93; P=.003). There were also significant reductions in special care nursery admissions during lockdown (11.53% vs 12.51%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.95; P<.0001). There was a trend to fewer spontaneous preterm births <37 weeks in the exposed group of a similar magnitude to that reported in other countries (2.69% vs 2.82%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.05; P=.32).ConclusionLockdown restrictions in Melbourne, Australia were associated with a significant reduction in iatrogenic preterm birth for fetal compromise and a significant increase in preterm stillbirths. This raises concerns that pandemic conditions in 2020 may have led to a failure to identify and appropriately care for pregnant women at an increased risk of antepartum stillbirth. Further research is required to understand the relationship between these 2 findings and to inform our ongoing responses to the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9017088 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to assess participatory methods for obtaining community views on child health research.BackgroundCommunity participation in research is recognised as an important part of the research process; however, there has been inconsistency in its implementation and application in Australia. The Western Australian Telethon Kids Institute Participation Program employs a range of methods for fostering active involvement of community members in its research. These include public discussion forums, called Community Conversations. While participation levels are good, the attendees represent only a sub-section of the Western Australian population. Therefore, we conducted a telephone survey of randomly selected households to evaluate its effectiveness in eliciting views from a broader cross-section of the community about our research agenda and community participation in research, and whether the participants would be representative of the general population. We also conducted two Conversations, comparing the survey as a recruitment tool and normal methods using the Participation Program.ResultsWhile the telephone survey was a good method for eliciting community views about research, there were marked differences in the profile of study participants compared to the general population (e.g. 78% vs 50% females). With a 26% response rate, the telephone survey was also more expensive than a Community Conversation. The cold calling approach proved an unsuccessful recruitment method, with only two out of a possible 816 telephone respondents attending a Conversation.ConclusionWhile the results showed that both of the methods produced useful input for our research program, we could not conclude that either method gained input that was representative of the entire community. The Conversations were relatively low-cost and provided more in-depth information about one subject, whereas the telephone survey provided information across a greater range of subjects, and allowed more quantitative analysis.
| S-EPMC4418596 | biostudies-literature