Stimulating the Uptake of Preconception Care by Women With a Vulnerable Health Status Through mHealth App-Based Nudging (Pregnant Faster): Cocreation Design and Protocol for a Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Women with a low socioeconomic status often have a vulnerable health status due to an accumulation of health-deteriorating factors such as poor lifestyle behaviors, including inadequate nutrition, mental stressors, and impaired health literacy and agency, which puts them at an unnecessary high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Adequately preparing for pregnancy through preconception care (PCC) uptake and lifestyle improvement can improve these outcomes. We hypothesize that nudging is a successful way of encouraging engagement in PCC. A nudge is a behavioral intervention that changes choice behavior through influencing incentives. The mobile health (mHealth) app-based loyalty program Pregnant Faster aims to reward women in an ethically justified way and nudges to engage in pregnancy preparation by visiting a PCC consultation. OBJECTIVE: Here, we first describe the process of the cocreation of the mHealth app Pregnant Faster that aims to increase engagement in pregnancy preparation by women with a vulnerable health status. Second, we describe the cohort study design to assess the feasibility of Pregnant Faster. METHODS: The content of the app is based on the eHealth lifestyle coaching program Smarter Pregnancy, which has proven to be effective in ameliorating preconceptional lifestyle behaviors (folic acid, vegetables, fruits, smoking, and alcohol) and an interview study pertaining to the preferences of the target group with regard to an mHealth app stimulating PCC uptake. For moral guidance on the design, an ethical framework was developed based on the bioethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress. The app was further developed through iterative cocreation with the target group and health care providers. For 4 weeks, participants will engage with Pregnant Faster, during which opportunities will arise to earn coins such as reading informative blogs and registering for a PCC consultation. Coins can be spent on small fun rewards, such as folic acid, fruits, and mascara. Pregnant Faster's feasibility will be tested in a study including 40 women aged 18 to 45 years, who are preconceptional or <8 weeks pregnant, with a low educational level, and living in a deprived neighborhood. The latter 2 factors will serve as a proxy of a low socioeconomic status. Recruitment will take place through flyers, social media, and health care practices. After finalization, participants will evaluate the app through the "mHealth App Usability Questionnaire" and additional interviews or questionnaires. RESULTS: Results are expected to be published by December 2023. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant Faster has been designed through iterative cocreation with the target group and health care professionals. With the designed study, we will test Pregnant Faster's feasibility. If overall user satisfaction and PCC uptake is achieved, the app will be further developed and the cohort will be continued with an additional 400 inclusions to establish effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/45293.

Incentives for Smoking Cessation During Pregnancy: An Ethical Framework.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking during pregnancy increases the risk of morbidity and mortality of the mother and child. The inability of the unborn child to protect itself, raises the social and academic responsibility to protect the child from the harmful effects of smoking. Interventions including rewards (incentives) for lifestyle changes are an upcoming trend and can encourage women to quit smoking. However, these incentives can, as we will argue, also have negative consequences, for example the restriction of personal autonomy and encouragement of smoking to become eligible for participation. To prevent these negative consequences, we developed an ethical framework that enables to assess and address unwanted consequences of incentive-based interventions whereby moral permissibility can be evaluated. AIMS AND METHODS: The possible adverse consequences of incentives were identified through an extensive literature search. Subsequently, we developed ethical criteria to identify these consequences based on the biomedical ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress. RESULTS: Our framework consists of 12 criteria. These criteria concern (1) effectiveness, (2) support of a healthy lifestyle, (3) motivational for the target population, (4) stimulating unhealthy behavior, (5) negative attitudes, (6) personal autonomy, (7) intrinsic motivation, (8) privacy, (9) fairness, (10) allocation of incentives, (11) cost-effectiveness, and (12) health inequity. Based on these criteria, the moral permissibility of potential interventions can be evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Incentives for smoking cessation are a response to the responsibility to protect the unborn child. But these interventions might have possible adverse effects. This ethical framework aims to identify and address ethical pitfalls in order to avoid these adverse effects. IMPLICATIONS: Although various interventions to promote smoking cessation during pregnancy exist, many women still smoke during pregnancy. Interventions using incentives for smoking cessation during pregnancy are a promising and upcoming trend but can have unwanted consequences. This ethical framework helps to identify and address ethical pitfalls in order to avoid these adverse effects.It can be a practical tool in the development and evaluation of these interventions and in evaluating the moral permissibility of interventions using incentives for smoking cessation during pregnancy.

Forced caesareans: applying ordinary standards to an extraordinary case.

Is it morally justifiable to force non-consenting pregnant women to submit to caesarean surgery to save their fetus in distress? Even though proponents and opponents largely agree on the interests at stake, such as the health and life of the fetus and the respect for bodily integrity and autonomy of pregnant women, they disagree on which moral weight to attach to these interests. This is why disagreements about the justifiability of forced caesareans tend to be pervasive and intractable. To sidestep this deadlock, we will focus on conditions that give rise to the 'caesarean dilemma' in the first place, namely the conflict between inherent norms and values medical professionals are committed to by virtue of being a medical professional. Using the reflective equilibrium, we will test the opponents' and proponents' considered judgments about forced caesareans against the norms and values they-as medical professionals-are committed to and determine whether they are coherent. Subsequently we will identify the proponents' incoherencies between the considered judgments and norms and values they are committed to and conclude that as long as these incoherencies are in place, forced caesareans are morally impermissible.