Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models

Andrew Symon; Jan Pringle; Soo Downe; Vanora Hundley; Elaine Lee; Fiona Lynn; Alison McFadden; Jenny McNeill; Mary Renfrew; Mary Ross-Davie; Edwin R. van Teijlingen; Heather Whitford; Fiona Alderdice

doi:10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3

Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models

Andrew Symon (Lead / Corresponding author), Jan Pringle, Soo Downe, Vanora Hundley, Elaine Lee, Fiona Lynn, Alison McFadden, Jenny McNeill, Mary Renfrew, Mary Ross-Davie, Edwin R. van Teijlingen, Heather Whitford, Fiona Alderdice

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

223 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Antenatal care models vary widely around the world, reflecting local contexts, drivers and resources. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have tested the impact of multi-component antenatal care interventions on service delivery and outcomes in many countries since the 1980s. Some have applied entirely new schemes, while others have modified existing care delivery approaches. Systematic reviews (SRs) indicate that some specific antenatal interventions are more effective than others; however the causal mechanisms leading to better outcomes are poorly understood, limiting implementation and future research. As a first step in identifying what might be making the difference we conducted a scoping review of interventions tested in RCTs in order to establish a taxonomy of antenatal care models.

Original language	English
Article number	8
Pages (from-to)	1-16
Number of pages	16
Journal	BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Volume	17
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3
Publication status	Published - 6 Jan 2017

Keywords

Pregnancy
Prenatal care
Antenatal care
Model of care
Health services research
Randomised controlled trial
Systematic review
Pregnancy outcome
Taxonomy

Access to Document

10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3

Final Published Version
© The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Final published version, 564 KBLicence: CC BY

Renfrew, Mary
Person
McFadden, Alison
- Health Sciences - Professor of Mother and Infant Public Health
Person: Academic
Symon, Andrew
- Health Sciences - Research Programme Manager
Person: Academic

Cite this

Symon, A., Pringle, J., Downe, S., Hundley, V., Lee, E., Lynn, F., McFadden, A., McNeill, J., Renfrew, M., Ross-Davie, M., van Teijlingen, E. R., Whitford, H., & Alderdice, F. (2017). Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 17, 1-16. Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3

@article{837a0c806c8d41e8ad77fa6b6b864ebc,

title = "Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models",

abstract = "Antenatal care models vary widely around the world, reflecting local contexts, drivers and resources. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have tested the impact of multi-component antenatal care interventions on service delivery and outcomes in many countries since the 1980s. Some have applied entirely new schemes, while others have modified existing care delivery approaches. Systematic reviews (SRs) indicate that some specific antenatal interventions are more effective than others; however the causal mechanisms leading to better outcomes are poorly understood, limiting implementation and future research. As a first step in identifying what might be making the difference we conducted a scoping review of interventions tested in RCTs in order to establish a taxonomy of antenatal care models.",

keywords = "Pregnancy , Prenatal care, Antenatal care , Model of care, Health services research, Randomised controlled trial , Systematic review , Pregnancy outcome, Taxonomy",

author = "Andrew Symon and Jan Pringle and Soo Downe and Vanora Hundley and Elaine Lee and Fiona Lynn and Alison McFadden and Jenny McNeill and Mary Renfrew and Mary Ross-Davie and {van Teijlingen}, {Edwin R.} and Heather Whitford and Fiona Alderdice",

note = "Funding: This project was undertaken as part of a programme grant from the Scottish Government Chief Nurse{\textquoteright}s Office to the SMART (Scottish Midwives Advancing Research Together) collaboration. The views expressed are those of the authors and not of the Scottish Government Chief Nurse{\textquoteright}s Office.",

year = "2017",

month = jan,

day = "6",

doi = "10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3",

language = "English",

volume = "17",

pages = "1--16",

journal = "BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth",

issn = "1471-2393",

publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Antenatal care trial interventions

T2 - a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models

AU - Symon, Andrew

AU - Pringle, Jan

AU - Downe, Soo

AU - Hundley, Vanora

AU - Lee, Elaine

AU - Lynn, Fiona

AU - McFadden, Alison

AU - McNeill, Jenny

AU - Renfrew, Mary

AU - Ross-Davie, Mary

AU - van Teijlingen, Edwin R.

AU - Whitford, Heather

AU - Alderdice, Fiona

N1 - Funding: This project was undertaken as part of a programme grant from the Scottish Government Chief Nurse’s Office to the SMART (Scottish Midwives Advancing Research Together) collaboration. The views expressed are those of the authors and not of the Scottish Government Chief Nurse’s Office.

PY - 2017/1/6

Y1 - 2017/1/6

N2 - Antenatal care models vary widely around the world, reflecting local contexts, drivers and resources. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have tested the impact of multi-component antenatal care interventions on service delivery and outcomes in many countries since the 1980s. Some have applied entirely new schemes, while others have modified existing care delivery approaches. Systematic reviews (SRs) indicate that some specific antenatal interventions are more effective than others; however the causal mechanisms leading to better outcomes are poorly understood, limiting implementation and future research. As a first step in identifying what might be making the difference we conducted a scoping review of interventions tested in RCTs in order to establish a taxonomy of antenatal care models.

AB - Antenatal care models vary widely around the world, reflecting local contexts, drivers and resources. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have tested the impact of multi-component antenatal care interventions on service delivery and outcomes in many countries since the 1980s. Some have applied entirely new schemes, while others have modified existing care delivery approaches. Systematic reviews (SRs) indicate that some specific antenatal interventions are more effective than others; however the causal mechanisms leading to better outcomes are poorly understood, limiting implementation and future research. As a first step in identifying what might be making the difference we conducted a scoping review of interventions tested in RCTs in order to establish a taxonomy of antenatal care models.

KW - Pregnancy

KW - Prenatal care

KW - Antenatal care

KW - Model of care

KW - Health services research

KW - Randomised controlled trial

KW - Systematic review

KW - Pregnancy outcome

KW - Taxonomy

U2 - 10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3

DO - 10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 28056877

SN - 1471-2393

VL - 17

SP - 1

EP - 16

JO - BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

JF - BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

M1 - 8

ER -

Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Profiles

Renfrew, Mary

McFadden, Alison

Symon, Andrew

Cite this