Stillbirths: rates, risk factors, and acceleration towards 2030.

An estimated 2.6 million third trimester stillbirths occurred in 2015 (uncertainty range 2.4-3.0 million). The number of stillbirths has reduced more slowly than has maternal mortality or mortality in children younger than 5 years, which were explicitly targeted in the Millennium Development Goals. The Every Newborn Action Plan has the target of 12 or fewer stillbirths per 1000 births in every country by 2030. 94 mainly high-income countries and upper middle-income countries have already met this target, although with noticeable disparities. At least 56 countries, particularly in Africa and in areas affected by conflict, will have to more than double present progress to reach this target. Most (98%) stillbirths are in low-income and middle-income countries. Improved care at birth is essential to prevent 1.3 million (uncertainty range 1.2-1.6 million) intrapartum stillbirths, end preventable maternal and neonatal deaths, and improve child development. Estimates for stillbirth causation are impeded by various classification systems, but for 18 countries with reliable data, congenital abnormalities account for a median of only 7.4% of stillbirths. Many disorders associated with stillbirths are potentially modifiable and often coexist, such as maternal infections (population attributable fraction: malaria 8.0% and syphilis 7.7%), non-communicable diseases, nutrition and lifestyle factors (each about 10%), and maternal age older than 35 years (6.7%). Prolonged pregnancies contribute to 14.0% of stillbirths. Causal pathways for stillbirth frequently involve impaired placental function, either with fetal growth restriction or preterm labour, or both. Two-thirds of newborns have their births registered. However, less than 5% of neonatal deaths and even fewer stillbirths have death registration. Records and registrations of all births, stillbirths, neonatal, and maternal deaths in a health facility would substantially increase data availability. Improved data alone will not save lives but provide a way to target interventions to reach more than 7000 women every day worldwide who experience the reality of stillbirth.

National, regional, and worldwide estimates of stillbirth rates in 2015, with trends from 2000: a systematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous estimates have highlighted a large global burden of stillbirths, with an absence of reliable data from regions where most stillbirths occur. The Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP) targets national stillbirth rates (SBRs) of 12 or fewer stillbirths per 1000 births by 2030. We estimate SBRs and numbers for 195 countries, including trends from 2000 to 2015. METHODS: We collated SBR data meeting prespecified inclusion criteria from national routine or registration systems, nationally representative surveys, and other data sources identified through a systematic review, web-based searches, and consultation with stillbirth experts. We modelled SBR (≥28 weeks' gestation) for 195 countries with restricted maximum likelihood estimation with country-level random effects. Uncertainty ranges were obtained through a bootstrap approach. FINDINGS: Data from 157 countries (2207 datapoints) met the inclusion criteria, a 90% increase from 2009 estimates. The estimated average global SBR in 2015 was 18·4 per 1000 births, down from 24·7 in 2000 (25·5% reduction). In 2015, an estimated 2·6 million (uncertainty range 2·4-3·0 million) babies were stillborn, giving a 19% decline in numbers since 2000 with the slowest progress in sub-Saharan Africa. 98% of all stillbirths occur in low-income and middle-income countries; 77% in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. INTERPRETATION: Progress in reducing the large worldwide stillbirth burden remains slow and insufficient to meet national targets such as for ENAP. Stillbirths are increasingly being counted at a local level, but countries and the global community must further improve the quality and comparability of data, and ensure that this is more clearly linked to accountability processes including the Sustainable Development Goals. FUNDING: Save the Children's Saving Newborn Lives programme to The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

Potential benefits of student- and junior doctor-led textbooks.

INTRODUCTION: Medical textbooks are an important teaching supplement. Few have junior doctors or medical students ('juniors') as primary contributors. However, the strengths of junior-led face-to-face teaching are now well-established, and we hypothesized that similar advantages would be transferrable to a textbook setting. METHODS: Juniors were approached to contribute to an independently published medical textbook, with senior clinicians recruited in parallel to ensure factual accuracy. Juniors directed every aspect of textbook writing and the production process. The published book stressed that it was an open collaboration with readers, inviting them to get in touch to evaluate the text and suggest ideas for new titles. RESULTS: Of 75 respondents, 93 % awarded the first textbook in the series 4 or 5 out of 5 for overall quality. Five other titles have been released, with seven more in development. Over 100 juniors are currently involved, with two students progressing from reviewers to editors after less than a year of mentorship. CONCLUSION: Juniors can be a motivated, dynamic, innovative group, capable of significant contributions to the medical textbook literature. This initiative has generated a sustainable infrastructure to facilitate junior-led publishing, and has the capacity for expansion to accommodate new initiatives and ideas.

Junior doctor-led 'near-peer' prescribing education for medical students.

AIMS: Prescribing errors are common and inadequate preparation of prescribers appears to contribute. A junior doctor-led prescribing tutorial programme has been developed for Edinburgh final year medical students to increase exposure to common prescribing tasks. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these tutorials on students and tutors. METHODS: One hundred and ninety-six tutorials were delivered to 183 students during 2010-2011. Each student completed a questionnaire after tutorial attendance which explored their previous prescribing experiences and the perceived benefits of tutorial attendance. Tutors completed a questionnaire which evaluated their teaching experiences and the impact on their prescribing practice. Student tutorial attendance was compared with end-of-year examination performance using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The students reported increased confidence in their prescribing knowledge and skills after attending tutorials. Students who attended more tutorials also tended to perform better in end-of-year examinations (Drug prescribing: r = 0.16, P = 0.015; Fluid prescribing: r = 0.18, P = 0.007). Tutors considered that participation enhanced their own prescribing knowledge and skills. Although they were occasionally unable to address student uncertainties, 80% of tutors reported frequently correcting misconceptions and deficits in student knowledge. Ninety-five percent of students expressed a preference for prescribing training delivered by junior doctors over more senior doctors. CONCLUSIONS: A 'near-peer' junior doctor-led approach to delivering prescribing training to medical students was highly valued by both students and tutors. Although junior doctors have relatively less clinical experience of prescribing, we believe that this can be addressed by training and academic supervision and is outweighed by the benefits of these tutorials.