Literature DB >> 33216402

Rating the seriousness of maternal and child health outcomes linked with pregnancy weight gain.

Lisa M Bodnar1,2, Dmitry Khodyakov3, Sara M Parisi1, Katherine P Himes2, Jessica G Burke4, Jennifer A Hutcheon5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Current pregnancy weight gain guidelines were developed based on implicit assumptions of a small group of experts about the relative seriousness of adverse health outcomes. Therefore, they will not necessarily reflect the values of women.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the seriousness of 11 maternal and child health outcomes that have been consistently associated with pregnancy weight gain by engaging patients and health professionals.
METHODS: We collected data using an online panel approach with a modified Delphi structure. We selected a purposeful sample of maternal and child health professionals (n = 84) and women who were pregnant or recently postpartum (patients) (n = 82) in the United States as panellists. We conducted three concurrent panels: professionals only, patients only, and patients and professionals. During a 3-round online modified Delphi process, participants rated the seriousness of health outcomes (Round 1), reviewed and discussed the initial results (Round 2), and revised their original ratings (Round 3). Panellists assigned seriousness ratings (0, [not serious] to 100 [most serious]) for infant death, stillbirth, preterm birth, gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, small-for-gestational-age (SGA) birth, large-for-gestational-age (LGA) birth, unplanned caesarean delivery, maternal obesity, childhood obesity, and maternal metabolic syndrome.
RESULTS: Each panel individually came to a consensus on all seriousness ratings. The final median seriousness ratings combined across all panels were highest for infant death (100), stillbirth (95), preterm birth (80), and preeclampsia (80). Obesity in children, metabolic syndrome in women, obesity in women, and gestational diabetes had median seriousness ratings ranging from 55 to 65. The lowest seriousness ratings were for SGA birth, LGA birth, and unplanned caesarean delivery (30-40).
CONCLUSION: Professionals and women rate some adverse outcomes as being more serious than others. These ratings can be used to establish the range of pregnancy weight gain associated with the lowest risk of a broad range of maternal and child health outcomes.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Delphi method; child health; maternal health; nutrition; patient-centred care; pregnancy; pregnancy weight gain

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33216402      PMCID: PMC8134513          DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12741

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol        ISSN: 0269-5022            Impact factor:   3.103


  29 in total

Review 1.  Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique.

Authors:  F Hasson; S Keeney; H McKenna
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.187

2.  Development of composite outcomes for individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis on the effects of diet and lifestyle in pregnancy: a Delphi survey.

Authors:  E Rogozinska; M I D'Amico; K S Khan; J G Cecatti; H Teede; S Yeo; C A Vinter; G Rayanagoudar; R Barakat; M Perales; J M Dodd; R Devlieger; A Bogaerts; M N M van Poppel; L Haakstad; G X Shen; A Shub; R Luoto; T I Kinnunen; S Phelan; L Poston; T T Scudeller; N El Beltagy; S N Stafne; S Tonstad; N R W Geiker; A E Ruifrok; B W Mol; A Coomarasamy; S Thangaratinam
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 6.531

3.  Assessing quality obstetrical care: development of standardized measures.

Authors:  Susan Mann; Stephen Pratt; Paul Gluck; Peter Nielsen; Daniel Risser; Penny Greenberg; Ronald Marcus; Marlene Goldman; David Shapiro; Mark Pearlman; Benjamin Sachs
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2006-09

4.  Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research.

Authors: 
Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process       Date:  1998-02

Review 5.  Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development.

Authors:  M K Murphy; N A Black; D L Lamping; C M McKee; C F Sanderson; J Askham; T Marteau
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 4.014

6.  Using an Online, Modified Delphi Approach to Engage Patients and Caregivers in Determining the Patient-Centeredness of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Care Considerations.

Authors:  Dmitry Khodyakov; Sean Grant; Brian Denger; Kathi Kinnett; Ann Martin; Marika Booth; Courtney Armstrong; Emily Dao; Christine Chen; Ian Coulter; Holly Peay; Glen Hazlewood; Natalie Street
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Composite outcomes: weighting component events according to severity assisted interpretation but reduced statistical power.

Authors:  Uchechukwu K A Sampson; Chris Metcalfe; Marc A Pfeffer; Scott D Solomon; Kelly H Zou
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  How can we recognize continuous quality improvement?

Authors:  Lisa Rubenstein; Dmitry Khodyakov; Susanne Hempel; Margie Danz; Susanne Salem-Schatz; Robbie Foy; Sean O'Neill; Siddhartha Dalal; Paul Shekelle
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 2.038

9.  Using perinatal morbidity scoring tools as a primary study outcome.

Authors:  Jennifer A Hutcheon; Lisa M Bodnar; Robert W Platt
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.710

10.  An exploration of the use of simple statistics to measure consensus and stability in Delphi studies.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Holey; Jennifer L Feeley; John Dixon; Vicki J Whittaker
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  1 in total

1.  The impact of panel composition and topic on stakeholder perspectives: Generating hypotheses from online maternal and child health modified-Delphi panels.

Authors:  Dmitry Khodyakov; Sujeong Park; Jennifer A Hutcheon; Sara M Parisi; Lisa M Bodnar
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 3.318

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.