Putting the “M” back in maternal-fetal medicine: A 5-year report card on a collaborative effort to address maternal morbidity and mortality in the United States
Open accessAbstract
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have demonstrated continuous increased risk for maternal mortality and severe morbidity with racial disparities among non-Hispanic black women an important contributing factor. More than 50,000 women experienced severe maternal morbidity in 2014, with a mortality rate of 18.0 per 100,000, higher than in many other developed countries. In 2012, the first "Putting the 'M' back in Maternal-Fetal Medicine" session was held at the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine's (SMFM) Annual Meeting. With the realization that rising risk for severe maternal morbidity and mortality required action, the "M in MFM" meeting identified the following urgent needs: (i) to enhance education and training in maternal care for maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) fellows; (ii) to improve the medical care and management of pregnant women across the country; and (iii) to address critical research gaps in maternal medicine. Since that first meeting, a broad collaborative effort has made a number of major steps forward, including the proliferation of maternal mortality review committees, advances in research, increasing educational focus on maternal critical care, and development of comprehensive clinical strategies to reduce maternal risk. Five years later, the 2017 M in MFM meeting served as a "report card" looking back at progress made but also looking forward to what needs to be done over the next 5 years, given that too many mothers still experience preventable harm and adverse outcomes.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The most common causes of maternal morbidity and mortality-hemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, infection, and sepsis-are often preceded by predictable vital signs perturbations in both high-resource and low-resource settings, and early intervention is key to improving outcomes.
“The most common causes of maternal morbidity and mortality—hemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, infection, and sepsis—are often preceded by predictable vital signs perturbations in both high-resource and low-resource settings, and early intervention is key to improving outcomes (4–9).”
From Comprehensive pregnancy monitoring with a network of wireless, soft, and flexible sensors in high- and low-resource health settings (2021) · cites this paper as [6]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 66 · Cited by 52
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [40]Hirshberg A, Bittle MD, VanDerTuyn M, Rapid-cycle innovation testing of text-based monitoring for management of postpartum hypertension. J Clin Outcomes Manage 2017; 24: 77– 85.
- Authors
- D’Alton, M. E., Friedman, A. M., Bernstein, P. S., Brown, H. L., Callaghan, W. M., Clark, S. L., Grobman, W. A., Kilpatrick, S. J., O’Keeffe, D. F., Montgomery, D. M., Srinivas, S. K., Wendel, G. D., Wenstrom, K. D., & Foley, M. R.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
- University of South Florida (US)
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
- Baylor University (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
- Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (US)
- Kaiser Permanente Riverside Medical Center (US)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Banner - University Medical Center Phoenix (US)
- Corresponding author
- D’Alton, Mary E.
- ORCID
- Venue
- American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 221
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 311-317.e1
- ISSN
- 0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6728226
- OpenAlex
- W2919778218
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 14
- FWCI
- 7.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
- Keywords
- maternal morbidity, maternal mortality, maternal-fetal medicine, racial disparities, non-Hispanic Black women, maternal mortality review committees, maternal critical care
- MeSH terms
- Simulation Training, Delivery of Health Care, Education, Medical, Graduate, Ethnicity, Fellowships and Scholarships, Female, Postpartum Hemorrhage, Humans, Hysterectomy, Maternal Health Services, Maternal Mortality, Obstetrics, Perinatology, Pre-Eclampsia, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Quality of Health Care, Research, Severity of Illness Index, United States, Health Status Disparities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review