Developing a question prompt tool to prevent and manage early cardiovascular disease after hypertensive pregnancy: qualitative interviews with women and clinicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persons (henceforth, women) who have hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are at risk of premature cardiovascular disease (CVD). While largely preventable through lifestyle management, many women and clinicians are unaware of the risk. Based on prior research, we developed a question prompt tool (QPT) on preventing and managing CVD after HDP. The purpose of this study was to refine QPT design. METHODS: We recruited Canadian women who had HDP and clinicians who might care for them using multiple strategies, conducted telephone interviews with consenting participants, and used qualitative description and inductive content analysis to derive themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 21 women who varied in HDP type, CVD status, years since HDP pregnancy, age, geography and ethno-cultural group; and 21 clinicians who varied in specialty (midwife, nurse practitioner, family physician, internist, obstetrician, cardiologist), geography and years in practice. Participating women and clinicians agreed on needed improvements: more instructions, lay and gender-neutral language, links to additional information, more space for answers, graphic appeal, and both print and electronic format. Both groups identified similar barriers: clinicians lack time/willingness, and low language/health literacy and access to technology among women; enablers: translated, credible source/endorser, culturally relevant, organized by health trajectory stages; and likely benefits: raise awareness, empower women, encourage them to adopt healthy lifestyle. Women desired exposure to the QPT before or during pregnancy, while clinicians recommended waiting until postpartum to avoid overwhelming women. Similarly, most women said the QPT should be available through multiple avenues to empower them for health self-advocacy, while clinicians thought they should introduce the QPT to women, and decide when and which questions to address. To mitigate reluctance, clinicians recommended self-directed educational materials accompany the QPT. CONCLUSIONS: We will use this information to refine QPT design and plan for future evaluation. If found to be effective and widely disseminated, the QPT could improve awareness and communication about this issue, and may reduce CVD risk in many women who have hypertensive pregnancies. Ongoing research is needed to more fully understand how QPTs support patient-clinician communication, and how to alert and prime both patients and clinicians to use QPTs.
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 | 0.050 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".