Jacqueline Matthew , Holly Lovell , Zenab Barry , Julie Nihouarn Sigurdardottir , Imogen Deforges , Lisa Story , Emily Skelton , Christina Malamateniou , Mary Rutherford , Sergio A. Silverio
{"title":"Diversity of representation in pregnancy research: A national mixed-methods survey of women’s perceptions and experiences in the United Kingdom","authors":"Jacqueline Matthew , Holly Lovell , Zenab Barry , Julie Nihouarn Sigurdardottir , Imogen Deforges , Lisa Story , Emily Skelton , Christina Malamateniou , Mary Rutherford , Sergio A. Silverio","doi":"10.1016/j.wombi.2025.101942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To explore the experiences and perceptions of women who may take part in antenatal research, including their perceived motivators, enablers, and barriers to participating in research with a sub-analysis of under-represented groups.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A mixed-methods parallel explanatory design was employed, and a national semi-structured online survey was circulated nationally using a start to end participatory framework. Likert scale responses and participant experience and demographic data were cross-tabulated to explore the differences between groups using descriptive and non-parametric statistics. A content analysis was used to explore open-ended questions and generate coding clusters. The qualitative and quantitative results were then merged using a using a pillar integration process.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>There were 260 survey responses across the UK, from Oct to Nov 2021 as part of wider research. Three meta-themes were developed from the merged integration: 1. Participation being mediated by perceptions and experience of safety, convenience, and communication, 2. Lived experience and education may increase access to research participation, and 3. Sociocultural differences may lead to research hesitancy.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Clinical researchers and research delivery teams working in antenatal settings, have the potential to impact the inclusion of underserved communities through facilitative research designs, well considered communication strategies, and authentic relationships which support participant education about research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48868,"journal":{"name":"Women and Birth","volume":"38 4","pages":"Article 101942"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Women and Birth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871519225000769","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim
To explore the experiences and perceptions of women who may take part in antenatal research, including their perceived motivators, enablers, and barriers to participating in research with a sub-analysis of under-represented groups.
Methods
A mixed-methods parallel explanatory design was employed, and a national semi-structured online survey was circulated nationally using a start to end participatory framework. Likert scale responses and participant experience and demographic data were cross-tabulated to explore the differences between groups using descriptive and non-parametric statistics. A content analysis was used to explore open-ended questions and generate coding clusters. The qualitative and quantitative results were then merged using a using a pillar integration process.
Findings
There were 260 survey responses across the UK, from Oct to Nov 2021 as part of wider research. Three meta-themes were developed from the merged integration: 1. Participation being mediated by perceptions and experience of safety, convenience, and communication, 2. Lived experience and education may increase access to research participation, and 3. Sociocultural differences may lead to research hesitancy.
Conclusion
Clinical researchers and research delivery teams working in antenatal settings, have the potential to impact the inclusion of underserved communities through facilitative research designs, well considered communication strategies, and authentic relationships which support participant education about research.
期刊介绍:
Women and Birth is the official journal of the Australian College of Midwives (ACM). It is a midwifery journal that publishes on all matters that affect women and birth, from pre-conceptual counselling, through pregnancy, birth, and the first six weeks postnatal. All papers accepted will draw from and contribute to the relevant contemporary research, policy and/or theoretical literature. We seek research papers, quality assurances papers (with ethical approval) discussion papers, clinical practice papers, case studies and original literature reviews.
Our women-centred focus is inclusive of the family, fetus and newborn, both well and sick, and covers both healthy and complex pregnancies and births. The journal seeks papers that take a woman-centred focus on maternity services, epidemiology, primary health care, reproductive psycho/physiology, midwifery practice, theory, research, education, management and leadership. We also seek relevant papers on maternal mental health and neonatal well-being, natural and complementary therapies, local, national and international policy, management, politics, economics and societal and cultural issues as they affect childbearing women and their families. Topics may include, where appropriate, neonatal care, child and family health, women’s health, related to pregnancy, birth and the postpartum, including lactation. Interprofessional papers relevant to midwifery are welcome. Articles are double blind peer-reviewed, primarily by experts in the field of the submitted work.