Clinical outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of remote obstetric antenatal monitoring: a systematic review
Le Vance, Jack Man, Rebecca Adeoye, Adekunle Amaranathan, Sneha Massey, Sian Gurney, Leo Morris, R Katie Hodgetts Morton, Victoria
Le Vance, Jack
Man, Rebecca
Adeoye, Adekunle
Amaranathan, Sneha
Massey, Sian
Gurney, Leo
Morris, R Katie
Hodgetts Morton, Victoria
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, remote technological initiatives for obstetric antenatal care have rapidly developed. However, variation in outcome reporting can preclude effective data synthesis. A remedy for this is to develop of a core outcome set (COS). However, prior to this, it is necessary to examine the heterogeneity of outcome reporting.
METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and PubMed databases from January 2015 to November 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), RCT protocols or pilot RCTs which assessed any outcome for any type of remote monitoring device during the obstetric antenatal period were included. Study characteristics, outcomes definitions and timings were extracted and descriptively analysed.
RESULTS: Of the 4904 papers screen, 40 studies were included (24 full RCTs, 10 protocols and six pilot RCTs) The most common remote monitoring devices used, either in isolation or in combination, were blood pressure (n = 17, 42.5%) and blood glucose (n = 16, 40.0%). In total, 1004 verbatim outcomes were noted, categorised into 361 unique outcomes, across 72 domains. Outcome definition was heterogenous, with glycaemic monitoring demonstrating the largest variation, with 29 different definitions. Longer-term outcomes were infrequently reported, with fewer than 6% of all outcomes evaluating more than 3 months postpartum. Maternal remote monitoring devices were most commonly assessed, with 29 studies solely evaluating these devices. No single outcome was reported in all studies.
CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates a lack of consistent outcome reporting for trials examining remote antenatal monitoring devices. Consequently, the development of a COS is recommended.
MIDER Authors
Affiliations
Date
2026-04-15
Type
Article
Collections
Citation
Le Vance J, Man R, Adeoye A, Amaranathan S, Massey S, Gurney L, Morris RK, Morton VH. Clinical outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of remote obstetric antenatal monitoring: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2026 Jun;322:115122. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2026.115122. Epub 2026 Apr 15