Pre-eclampsia risk-stratified planned birth at term: A survey of women's perspectives on acceptability and risk communication

Goadsby, James, Leung, Angel, Silverio, Sergio A ORCID: 0000-0001-7177-3471, Magee, Laura A, von Dadelszen, Peter, Syngelaki, Argyro, Nicolaides, Kypros H and Sheen, Kayleigh S (2026) Pre-eclampsia risk-stratified planned birth at term: A survey of women's perspectives on acceptability and risk communication ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA. ISSN 0001-6349, 1600-0412

Access the full-text of this item by clicking on the Open Access link.

Abstract

Introduction: Pre-eclampsia (PE) remains a major complication of pregnancies, globally, and while there is no intervention proven to be effective in decreasing late preterm and term PE; the PREVENT-PE trial aimed to evaluate whether the intervention—a strategy of screening for PE risk at 35–36 weeks' gestation, and for a risk of ≥1-in-50, offering risk-stratified, planned early term birth—could reduce the incidence of subsequent PE, compared with usual care. Material and Methods: We aimed to evaluate the acceptability of trial participation and risk communication for women participating in The PREVENT-PE trial [ISRCTN41632964] in the United Kingdom. From March to October 2024, trial participants were invited, antenatally and/or postnatally, to complete an online survey, and acceptability and risk communication measures were compared by trial arm. Results: Of those accessing the survey, 257 out of 478 (48.2%) were antenatal (median 35.4 weeks' gestation), and 485 out of 1617 (30.0%) were postnatal (median 25.6 weeks postnatally) respondents who were eligible. Antenatally, and by trial arm: (i) most women felt: comfortable with the trial (>70%); participation required little/no effort (>75%; 77.9% [intervention] vs. 91.7% [control], p = 0.05); confident in participation (>75%); the trial was acceptable (≈90%); and PE risk screening was fair (>90%), could reduce chances of becoming seriously ill (>90%), and understood how that could be achieved (>90%); (ii) half disagreed that timed birth for PE would interfere with competing priorities, although 20–30% agreed; (iii) ≥80% of participants felt listened to, were able to ask questions and receive helpful answers, had their preferences considered, had clear on the situation being discussed, and were confident about their decision; and (iv) ≈50% were uncertain about what was going to happen. Postnatally, views were more neutral, without an increase in negativity. Conclusions: Findings indicate that women find third-trimester screening for PE and risk-stratified planned early term birth highly acceptable, understand those risks, and the potential to favorably impact their pregnancy outcome.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	acceptability, patient surveys, pre-eclampsia, risk communication, trial evaluation
Divisions:	Faculty of Health & Life Sciences Faculty of Health & Life Sciences > Inst. Population Health Faculty of Health & Life Sciences > Inst. Population Health > Psychology Faculty of Health & Life Sciences > Inst. Population Health > Inst. Population Health (T&R Staff)
Depositing User:	Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited:	09 Jun 2026 14:10
Last Modified:	13 Jun 2026 03:28
DOI:	10.1111/aogs.70230
Open Access URL:	https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.70230
Related Websites:	Author Publisher
URI:	https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3198861
Disclaimer:	The University of Liverpool is not responsible for content contained on other websites from links within repository metadata. Please contact us if you notice anything that appears incorrect or inappropriate.