Barriers and facilitators of adherence to low-dose aspirin during pregnancy: A co-produced systematic review and COM-B framework synthesis of qualitative evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Women at increased risk of developing pre-eclampsia are advised to take a daily low-dose of aspirin from 12 weeks of pregnancy to reduce their risks. Despite the well-established prophylactic effect of aspirin, adherence to this therapy is low. This systematic review aimed to summarise evidence on the barriers and facilitators of adherence to low-dose aspirin to inform intervention development to support decision making and persistence with aspirin use for pre-eclampsia prevention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research was co-produced by representatives from charities, and public, clinical and academic members. Eight electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, Prospero, OpenGrey), archives of charities and professional organisations were searched (between October and November 2023 and re-run in August 2023) using predefined search terms. Studies containing qualitative components related to barriers and facilitators of adherence to low-dose aspirin during pregnancy were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative research. A combination of the COM-B framework with phases of adherence process as defined by international taxonomy was used as the coding framework. Co-production activities were facilitated by use of 'Zoom' and 'Linoit'. RESULTS: From a total of 3377 papers identified through our searches, five published studies and one dissertation met our inclusion criteria. Studies were published from 2019 to 2022 covering research conducted in the USA, Canada, UK, Netherlands and Australia. Barriers and facilitators to adherence were mapped to six categories of the COM-B for three phases of adherence: initiation, implementation, and discontinuation. The discontinuation phase of adherence was only mentioned by one author. Four key themes were identified relating to pregnancy: 'Insufficient knowledge', 'Necessity concerns balance', 'Access to medicine', 'Social influences', and 'Lack of Habit'. CONCLUSIONS: The COM-B framework allowed for detailed mapping of key factors shaping different phases of adherence in behavioural change terms and now provides a solid foundation for the development of a behavioural intervention. Although potential intervention elements could be suggested based on the results of this synthesis, additional co-production work is needed to define elements and plan for the delivery of the future intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022359718. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022359718.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.121 | 0.252 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.037 | 0.037 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".