Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Problem/ Background: The acceptability of providing women with personalised cardiometabolic risk information using risk prediction tools early in pregnancy is not well understood.
Aim: To explore women's and healthcare professionals' perspectives of the acceptability of a prognostic, composite risk prediction tool for cardiometabolic risk (gestational diabetes and/or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy) for use in early pregnancy.
Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the acceptability of cardiometabolic risk prediction tools, preferences for risk communication and considerations for implementation into antenatal care. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability informed interview questions. Transcripts were thematically analysed.
Findings: Women ≤24 weeks' gestation (n = 13) and healthcare professionals (n = 8), including midwives (n = 2), general practitioners (n = 2), obstetricians (n = 2), an endocrinologist (n = 1) and cardiologist (n = 1) participated. Participants indicated that providing personalised risk information is only appropriate when preventative measures can be initiated to mitigate risks. Differentiating the risk for each condition (single risk outputs) was often preferred to composite risk outputs to enable targeted monitoring and management. Defining conditions and risks to mother/baby, visually depicting personalised risk scores, and providing clear, patient-centred clinical management plans were recommended. Supportive clinical policy changes, staff engagement/training, and integration into electronic health records were suggested to facilitate uptake into routine antenatal care.
Conclusion: Women and healthcare professionals suggested that early pregnancy cardiometabolic risk prediction tools may be acceptable when preventative interventions are available to reduce risks. Risk prediction tools with integrated patient-centred education materials may promote timely access and engagement with preventative interventions to optimise women's current and future health.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2024.104270 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!