Article Text

Download PDFPDF

PS-052 Setting Preterm Birth Research Priorities With Multiple Professions And Service Users In The Uk
  1. S Uhm1,
  2. F Alderdice2,
  3. I Brady3,
  4. B Chambers1,
  5. Z Chivers4,
  6. S Crowe5,
  7. AL David6,
  8. S Deshpande7,
  9. C Gale8,
  10. G Gyte9,
  11. CP James6,
  12. L Duley10,
  13. J McNeill11,
  14. A Shennan12,
  15. MA Turner13,
  16. S Oliver1
  1. 1Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK
  2. 2The Premature Baby Charity for Northern Ireland, TinyLife, Carryduff, UK
  3. 3Irish Premature Baby, Irish Premature Baby, Dublin, Ireland
  4. 4The Premature and Special Care Baby Charity, Bliss, London, UK
  5. 5James Lind Alliance, James Lind Alliance, London, UK
  6. 6University College London, Institute for Women’s Health, London, UK
  7. 7British Association of Perinatal Medicine, British Association of Perinatal Medicine, London, UK
  8. 8Academic Neonatal Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK
  9. 9National Childbirth Trust, National Childbirth Trust, London, UK
  10. 10University of Nottingham, Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, Nottingham, UK
  11. 11The Premature Baby Charity for Northern Ireland, TinyLife, Carryduf, UK
  12. 12Kings College London, Kings College London, London, UK
  13. 13Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK


Background Preterm birth is the most important determinant of adverse infant outcomes. Research agendas in this area have been determined primarily by researchers.

Objectives To identify and prioritise future research areas in preterm birth that are most important to service users and practitioners.

Methods A priority setting partnership was established with families with experience of preterm birth and organisations representing them, obstetricians, neonatologists, midwives and neonatal nurses. Research uncertainties were gathered from surveys and analysis of systematic reviews and clinical guidance. Prioritisation was through voting; final ranking occurred at a facilitated workshop, as advocated by the James Lind Alliance.

Results 593 uncertainties were submitted by 386 respondents (58% service users, 30% healthcare professionals and 12% from those in both roles); 52 were identified from literature reviews. After merging similar questions, 104 were distributed for voting. From the 30 most popular uncertainties, the top 15 questions were prioritised in a facilitated workshop These include prevention and prediction of preterm birth, neonatal infection, lung damage, necrotising enterocolitis, pre-eclampsia, preterm premature rupture of the membranes, optimal neonatal feeding strategy, pain perception and management, a care package at neonatal discharge, emotional and practical support, attachment and bonding, and the best time for cord clamping.

Conclusions These priorities provide guidance to ensure that future research addresses questions that are important to service users and clinicians. Challenges for the priority setting partnership included maximising participation amongst people most affected by preterm birth, the breadth of the topic and securing input from an appropriate range of clinicians.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.