Dataset Information

Implementation of maternal and perinatal death reviews: a scoping review protocol.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR), or any related form of audit, is a systematic process used to prevent future maternal and perinatal deaths. While the existence of MPDSR policies is routinely measured, measurement and understanding of policy implementation has lagged behind. In this paper, we present a theory-based conceptual framework for understanding MPDSR implementation as well as a scoping review protocol to understand factors influencing MPDSR implementation in low/ middle-income countries (LMIC). METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research will inform the development of a theory-based conceptual framework for MPDSR implementation. The methodology for the scoping review will be guided by an adapted Arksey and O'Malley approach. Documents will include published and grey literature sourced from electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science, JSTOR, LILACS), the WHO Library, Maternal Death Surveillance and Response Action Network, Google, the reference lists of key studies and key experts. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full studies for inclusion. All discrepancies will be resolved by an independent third party. We will include studies published in English from 2004 to July 2018 that present results on factors influencing implementation of MPDSR, or any related form. Qualitative content and thematic analysis will be applied to extracted data according to the theory-based conceptual framework. Stakeholders will be consulted at various stages of the process. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The scoping review will synthesise implementation factors relating to MPDSR in LMIC as described in the literature. This review will contribute to the work of the Countdown to 2030 Drivers Group, which seeks to explore key contextual drivers for equitable and effective coverage of maternal and child health interventions. Ethics approval is not required. The results will be disseminated through various channels, including a peer-reviewed publication.

SUBMITTER: Kinney MV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6886965 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Maternal and perinatal death surveillance and response (MPDSR), or any form of maternal and/or perinatal death review or audit, aims to improve health services and pre-empt future maternal and perinatal deaths. With expansion of MPDSR across low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), we conducted a scoping review to identify and describe implementation factors and their interactions. The review adapted an implementation framework with four domains (intervention, individual, inner and outer settings) and three cross-cutting health systems lenses (service delivery, societal and systems). Literature was sourced from six electronic databases, online searches and key experts. Selection criteria included studies from LMIC published in English from 2004 to July 2018 detailing factors influencing implementation of MPDSR, or any related form of MPDSR. After a systematic screening process, data for identified records were extracted and analysed through content and thematic analysis. Of 1027 studies screened, the review focuses on 58 studies from 24 countries, primarily in Africa, that are mainly qualitative or mixed methods. The literature mostly examines implementation factors related to MPDSR as an intervention, and to its inner and outer setting, with less attention to the individuals involved. From a health systems perspective, almost half the literature focuses on the tangible inputs addressed by the service delivery lens, though these are often measured inadequately or through incomparable ways. Though less studied, the societal and health system factors show that people and their relationships, motivations, implementation climate and ability to communicate influence implementation processes; yet their subjective experiences and relationships are inadequately explored. MPDSR implementation contributes to accountability and benefits from a culture of learning, continuous improvement and accountability, but few have studied the complex interplay and change dynamics involved. Better understanding MPDSR will require more research using health policy and systems approaches, including the use of implementation frameworks.

Project description:IntroductionA 2011 paper proposed a working taxonomy of implementation outcomes, their conceptual distinctions and a two-pronged research agenda on their role in implementation success. Since then, over 1100 papers citing the manuscript have been published. Our goal is to compare the field's progress to the originally proposed research agenda, and outline recommendations for the next 10 years. To accomplish this, we are conducting the proposed scoping review.Methods and analysisOur approach is informed by Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews. We will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. We first aim to assess the degree to which each implementation outcome has been investigated in the literature, including healthcare settings, clinical populations and innovations represented. We next aim to describe the relationship between implementation strategies and outcomes. Our last aim is to identify studies that empirically assess relationships among implementation and/or service and client outcomes. We will use a forward citation tracing approach to identify all literature that cited the 2011 paper in the Web of Science (WOS) and will supplement this with citation alerts sent to the second author for a 6-month period coinciding with the WOS citation search. Our review will focus on empirical studies that are designed to assess at least one of the identified implementation outcomes in the 2011 taxonomy and are published in peer-reviewed journals. We will generate descriptive statistics from extracted data and organise results by these research aims.Ethics and disseminationNo human research participants will be involved in this review. We plan to share findings through a variety of means including peer-reviewed journal publications, national conference presentations, invited workshops and webinars, email listservs affiliated with our institutions and professional associations, and academic social media.

Project description:ObjectivesOver the last two decades, the number of scoping reviews in core medical education journals has increased by 4200%. Despite this growth, research on scoping reviews provides limited information about their nature, including how they are conducted or why medical educators undertake this knowledge synthesis type. This gap makes it difficult to know where the field stands and may hamper attempts to improve the conduct, reporting and utility of scoping reviews. Thus, this review characterises the nature of medical education scoping reviews to identify areas for improvement and highlight future research opportunities.MethodThe authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1/1999 and 4/2020 in 14 medical education journals. The authors extracted and summarised key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR. Rationales and research questions were mapped to Arksey and O'Malley's reasons for conducting a scoping review.ResultsOne hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average, 10.1 scoping reviews (SD = 13.1, median = 4) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n = 42). Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews; the most prevalent being to summarise and disseminate research findings (n = 77). In 11 reviews, the rationales for the scoping review and the research questions aligned. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with few authors publishing a protocol (n = 2) or including stakeholders (n = 20). Authors identified shortcomings of scoping reviews, including lack of critical appraisal.ConclusionsScoping reviews are increasingly conducted in medical education and published by most core journals. Scoping reviews aim to map the depth and breadth of emerging topics; as such, they have the potential to play a critical role in the practice, policy and research of medical education. However, these results suggest improvements are needed for this role to be fully realised.

Project description:Background: Pregnant and postpartum women have been historically excluded from clinical trials, with data on the safety of drugs relying on observational research. Methodological concerns regarding the timing and dosing of medications, data sources, study designs, and methods used for estimating associations are still problematic in observational studies. Answering causal questions is even more complex. Despite the increased interest in emulating target trials using observational data, little is known about this approach in perinatal pharmacoepidemiology. Objective: This scoping review protocol aims to describe the methodology for assessing the available literature concerning emulating target trials for studying outcomes in women exposed to medications in the preconception, perinatal, or postpartum periods. Methods and Analysis: We will follow the methods detailed in the Joanna Briggs Institute reviewer’s manual. We will adopt the six-stage framework recommended by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac and others. Web scraping techniques will be used for identifying relevant studies. Two authors will select articles based on the title and abstract, with discrepancies resolved by consensus, by a third reviewer. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews flow diagram will be presented to reflect the search process. We will use existing statements to identify quality gaps in the current literature. Variables related to the content for perinatal pharmacoepidemiologic research will be included. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) will guide the assessment of the target trial emulation (i.e., treatment strategies compared, assignment procedures, follow-up period, outcome, and causal contrasts). Discussion: Data regarding the safety of drugs taken, prior to and during pregnancy and while lactating are lacking and it is necessary to understand how we can answer these questions using rigorous methods in observational research. Through this scoping review, we intend to understand to what extent the target trial approach is being used in perinatal pharmacoepidemiology and provide recommendations to improve its use in this field. Ethics and Dissemination: Secondary data from published scientific articles will be used, not requiring approval by the Research Ethics Committee with human beings. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.

Project description:IntroductionMothers with diabetes face unique challenges associated with breastfeeding initiation and maintenance. Antenatal breastmilk expression (BME) may be suggested to mothers, including mothers with diabetes, to improve breastfeeding, maternal, and infant outcomes postpartum. However, there have been few evaluations of the potential harms and benefits of this practice. The objective of our scoping review will be to broadly examine the literature describing maternal and infant outcomes of antenatal BME.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will address the research question: 'Among women who engaged in antenatal BME, what maternal and infant outcomes have been evaluated?' A search of published and unpublished studies available in English will be conducted in February 2020 using the following databases: Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OVID). A search of the British Library E-Theses Online Services (EThOS) database and OpenGrey will be conducted to identify relevant grey literature. This scoping review will use a five-step framework to guide the selection, extraction, and analysis of eligible studies. Clinical consultation will be included as a sixth step to our methodology. Literature reporting on the effect of antenatal BME on maternal and infant outcomes, breastfeeding initiation and duration, and the experiences of women who have engaged in the practice will be considered. The data will be summarised with attention paid to high-risk obstetrical populations such as women with diabetes. Our results will be reported as outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics board approval will not be required due to the nature of the study's methodology. The results of this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentation at relevant conferences.Trail registration numberOpen Science Framework (osf.io/gfp2q).

Dataset Information

Implementation of maternal and perinatal death reviews: a scoping review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets