Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 May 30;21(5):e1004405.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004405. eCollection 2024 May.

Factors influencing the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials: A mixed-methods systematic review

Affiliations

Factors influencing the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials: A mixed-methods systematic review

Mridula Shankar et al. PLoS Med. .

Abstract

Background: Poor representation of pregnant and lactating women and people in clinical trials has marginalised their health concerns and denied the maternal-fetal/infant dyad benefits of innovation in therapeutic research and development. This mixed-methods systematic review synthesised factors affecting the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials, across all levels of the research ecosystem.

Methods and findings: We searched 8 databases from inception to 14 February 2024 to identify qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies that described factors affecting participation of pregnant and lactating women in vaccine and therapeutic clinical trials in any setting. We used thematic synthesis to analyse the qualitative literature and assessed confidence in each qualitative review finding using the GRADE-CERQual approach. We compared quantitative data against the thematic synthesis findings to assess areas of convergence or divergence. We mapped review findings to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B) to inform future development of behaviour change strategies. We included 60 papers from 27 countries. We grouped 24 review findings under 5 overarching themes: (a) interplay between perceived risks and benefits of participation in women's decision-making; (b) engagement between women and the medical and research ecosystems; (c) gender norms and decision-making autonomy; (d) factors affecting clinical trial recruitment; and (e) upstream factors in the research ecosystem. Women's willingness to participate in trials was affected by: perceived risk of the health condition weighed against an intervention's risks and benefits, therapeutic optimism, intervention acceptability, expectations of receiving higher quality care in a trial, altruistic motivations, intimate relationship dynamics, and power and trust in medicine and research. Health workers supported women's participation in trials when they perceived clinical equipoise, had hope for novel therapeutic applications, and were convinced an intervention was safe. For research staff, developing reciprocal relationships with health workers, having access to resources for trial implementation, ensuring the trial was visible to potential participants and health workers, implementing a woman-centred approach when communicating with potential participants, and emotional orientations towards the trial were factors perceived to affect recruitment. For study investigators and ethics committees, the complexities and subjectivities in risk assessments and trial design, and limited funding of such trials contributed to their reluctance in leading and approving such trials. All included studies focused on factors affecting participation of cisgender pregnant women in clinical trials; future research should consider other pregnancy-capable populations, including transgender and nonbinary people.

Conclusions: This systematic review highlights diverse factors across multiple levels and stakeholders affecting the participation of pregnant and lactating women in clinical trials. By linking identified factors to frameworks of behaviour change, we have developed theoretically informed strategies that can help optimise pregnant and lactating women's engagement, participation, and trust in such trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. PRISMA flowchart depicting search and selection process.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Scaffidi J, Mol BW, Keelan JA. The pregnant women as a drug orphan: A global survey of registered clinical trials of pharmacological interventions in pregnancy. BJOG. 2017;124(1):132–40. Epub 20160614. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14151 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ren Z, Bremer AA, Pawlyk AC. Drug development research in pregnant and lactating women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225(1):33–42. Epub 20210419. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.04.227 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shields KE, Lyerly AD. Exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122 (5):1077–1081. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a9ca67 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jaffe EF, Lyerly AD, Goldfarb IT. Advancing research in pregnancy during COVID-19: Missed opportunities and momentum in the US. Med. 2021;2(5):460–4. doi: 10.1016/j.medj.2021.04.019 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rubin R. Pregnant people’s paradox-excluded from vaccine trials despite having a higher risk of COVID-19 complications. JAMA. 2021;325(11):1027–8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.2264 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding

The research in this publication was supported by funding from MSD (grant MFM-22-159697 to Concept Foundation), through its MSD for Mothers initiative (https://www.msdformothers.com/) and is the sole responsibility of the authors. MSD for Mothers is an initiative of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, U.S.A. MAB’s time is supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE200100264) and a Dame Kate Campbell Fellowship (University of Melbourne Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences). JPV is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator grant (GNT1194248). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.