Sina Haeri

Citing a Commonwealth Fund brief, they describe severe maternal morbidity as hemorrhage requiring transfusion, unplanned hysterectomy, stroke, sepsis, eclampsia, and ICU admission.

• The numbers they highlight: more than 32,500 US women experience it each year; affected women are 31 times more likely to die within a year of delivery; their infants are nearly four times more likely to die at birth or in the first year; Black mothers face rates roughly 90% higher than white mothers; and complicated deliveries cost more than twice as much.
• They read these figures as downstream effects of fragmented care, delayed access, and missed prevention, not isolated complications.

Haeri points to data presented at the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine annual meeting showing that teleMFM implementation was associated with a 34% reduction in severe maternal morbidity at hospitals that previously had no MFM coverage.

Read original

They acknowledge the reported $3.8 million annual loss on obstetric services but argue the balance sheet should also count mothers hemorrhaging on long transfers, families deciding not to settle where maternity care is unavailable, and health systems losing patient relationships that often begin in the delivery room.

• Brattleboro's primary cesarean rate is about 13% against roughly 23% nationally, and Vermont earned an A from March of Dimes.
• Haeri argues the issue is underfunding, not poor care.

A piece by Dr.

• Corina Tennant describes a 23-week delivery after the mother became too unstable to transfer and another patient arriving in hemorrhagic shock after a 45-minute ambulance ride; Haeri notes that thirty more minutes likely would have meant death.
• Their proposed fixes are standby capacity payments for rural obstetric units, Medicaid reimbursement that covers the actual cost of maternity care, and virtual maternal-fetal medicine and telehealth so high-risk patients can receive specialist care without leaving their community.

Read original

Citing the Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health state report cards, where the national grade moved from C- to C, they acknowledge modest progress but argue that screening without timely treatment identifies a problem without solving it. Their priority is to embed behavioral health clinicians in the perinatal care team alongside obstetricians, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, nurses, and care coordinators.

Haeri points to Ouma Health's behavioral health team, led by Lauren Hays, as an example of integration with the rest of the clinical services.

Read original

They highlight that $977.5 million was raised, but 52% of capital went to just three companies; 34.6% of active startups focus on general wraparound support such as coaches, classes, and doulas; only about 34% of startups whose services could reasonably accept Medicaid actually do; and only one in six mention health equity on their websites, while barely one in five mention maternal mortality at all.

• Their argument is that the shortage is not digital health apps but high-risk clinical care where it is needed, and that wellness platforms and direct-to-consumer maternity apps largely serve commercial and employer-sponsored populations.
• They say the crisis is concentrated in rural communities, maternity care deserts, and safety-net populations covered by Medicaid, and falls hardest on Black birthing people, who are 2.6 times more likely to die of pregnancy-related causes.

Haeri says Ouma Health deliberately did not take the venture route, describing the choice as practicing medicine rather than wellness or general wraparound support. They invite leaders of Medicaid health plans, FQHCs, and rural health systems to get in touch.

Haeri criticizes where venture money goes, while arguing that no single company can fix the problem alone. They say watching venture-backed companies shows where patients do—and do not—get care.

Read original

They say every ultrasound is read by a board-certified maternal-fetal medicine physician, not a radiologist who occasionally reads obstetric imaging or an OB/GYN squeezing in a second read between deliveries. They cite a study presented with Penn colleagues at the SMFM annual meeting: out of 6,403 scans, MFM review identified a potential missed diagnosis in 34.5% of studies previously called normal, with cardiac anomalies among the most commonly missed findings.

Haeri lists the service's operating terms: 100% MFM interpretation, licensure in all 50 states, 24-hour routine turnaround, STAT reads within two hours at no additional charge, no subscriptions, account management, or setup fees, and practices keeping their existing billing relationship. The sites they name as customers include community midwives attending home births, birth centers, mobile imaging companies crossing state lines, independent OB/GYN practices, women's health MSOs, and health systems.

Read original

They see telehealth and virtual maternal-fetal medicine as practical ways to extend specialist care, and argue that screening, referral, or an app alone cannot replace treatment and subspecialty review.

The same principle takes different forms: virtual MFM to reduce severe maternal morbidity at hospitals without MFM coverage, Brattleboro's proposed telehealth infrastructure so high-risk patients do not have to leave the community, Medicaid-focused clinical care for FQHCs and rural health systems, and MFM interpretation of ultrasound scans whether or not a practice has an MFM on site.

Read original · Original 2 · Original 3 · Original 4

A clear introduction to the clinical service model.

Sina Haeri explains Ouma Health's model: every ultrasound is read by a board-certified Maternal-Fetal Medicine physician, not a radiologist who occasionally reads obstetric imaging or an OB/GYN doing a second read between deliveries.

• The post cites a study they presented with Penn colleagues at the SMFM Annual Meeting: out of 6,403 scans, MFM review identified a potential missed diagnosis in 34.5% of studies previously called normal, with cardiac anomalies among the most commonly missed findings.
• Operating terms include 100% MFM interpretation, licensing in all 50 states, 24-hour routine turnaround, STAT reads within two hours at no additional charge, no subscriptions, account management, or setup fees, and the option for practices to keep their existing billing relationship.
• The model serves community midwives, birth centers, mobile imaging companies, independent OB/GYN practices, women's health MSOs, and health systems.

For brands planning a campaign

For a maternal health telehealth or Medicaid plan brief, this is the strongest starting point for specialist review without an in-house MFM. It pairs a measurable quality claim with a clear service definition and operating terms that can be checked in a campaign brief.

A useful starting point for the clinical rationale and outcomes behind a campaign on severe maternal morbidity and maternal mortality.

Sina Haeri cites a Commonwealth Fund brief on severe maternal morbidity, meaning life-threatening complications such as massive hemorrhage requiring transfusion, unplanned hysterectomy, stroke, sepsis, eclampsia, and ICU admission.

• The post reports that more than 32,500 women experience severe maternal morbidity each year in the US, likely an underestimate because current measures miss many prenatal, postpartum, and mental health complications.
• Women who experience severe maternal morbidity are 31 times more likely to die within one year of delivery, and their infants are nearly 4 times more likely to die during birth or in the first year.
• Non-Hispanic Black mothers experience rates roughly 90% higher than non-Hispanic White mothers; risks are also higher among Medicaid beneficiaries, women over 35, and lower-income families.
• Deliveries complicated by severe maternal morbidity cost more than twice as much as uncomplicated births.
• Haeri frames severe maternal morbidity as the downstream consequence of fragmented care, delayed access, missed prevention, and inadequate support before and after delivery.
• Earlier that year, they presented data at the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Annual Meeting on teleMFM implementation associated with a 34% reduction in severe maternal morbidity at hospitals without prior MFM coverage.
• The post calls for expanding access to high-risk obstetric care, strengthening postpartum follow-up, integrating behavioral health, and ensuring geography or insurance status does not determine timely specialty care.

For brands planning a campaign

For a brief aimed at reducing severe maternal morbidity in rural and safety-net populations, this post supplies the core problem statement, a named outcome claim, and specific policy and care-delivery asks. It frames severe maternal morbidity as a preventable warning sign, not an isolated complication.

Useful for market positioning and the contrast between venture-backed startups and safety-net clinical care.

Sina Haeri summarizes a JAMA Health Forum study by Madeline Perry and colleagues of 172 venture-backed maternal health startups founded between 2014 and 2022.

• The post reports that $977.5 million was raised, but 52% of all capital went to just 3 companies; 34.6% of active startups focus on general wraparound support such as coaches, classes, and doulas; among startups whose services could reasonably accept Medicaid, only about 34% do; and just 1 in 6 mention health equity on their websites while barely 1 in 5 mention maternal mortality at all.
• Haeri says Ouma Health deliberately avoided the venture route to practice medicine, not wellness or general wraparound support, and build relationship-based subspecialty clinical care for safety-net populations, including Medicaid health plans, FQHCs, and rural health systems.
• The post argues that the US maternal mortality crisis is concentrated in rural communities, maternity care deserts, and safety-net populations covered by Medicaid, and that Black birthing people are 2.6 times more likely to die of pregnancy-related causes.
• It invites leaders of Medicaid health plans, FQHCs, and rural health systems to get in touch.

For brands planning a campaign

For a Medicaid plan or rural health system brief, this post sets up a sharp contrast between high-risk clinical care and B2C maternity apps and general wellness platforms. It explains how a safety-net clinical model differs and whom it serves.

A strong fit when a campaign centers perinatal mental health rather than physical obstetric complications alone.

Sina Haeri cites the Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health's Maternal Mental Health State Report Cards, which show the national grade improved from a C- to a C.

• The post states that one in five mothers will experience a perinatal mental health condition, that these conditions account for nearly 20% of maternal deaths in the United States, and that most pregnant and postpartum patients are still never screened, while many who are screened never receive treatment.
• Obstetric care and behavioral health often exist in separate worlds: patients are screened, given a referral, then expected to navigate a fragmented behavioral health system while managing pregnancy, work, transportation, childcare, and insurance barriers.
• Haeri argues that maternal mental health must become a core component of prenatal care, with behavioral health clinicians embedded in the perinatal care team alongside obstetricians, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, nurses, and care coordinators.
• The post says Ouma Health's behavioral health team, led by Lauren Hays, is deeply integrated with its other clinical services.

For brands planning a campaign

For a maternal mental health campaign, this post offers a policy hook and an integration argument that goes beyond awareness. It supports briefs for Medicaid plans, behavioral health partners, or telehealth services by showing why screening without timely treatment does not change outcomes.

Sina Haeri recalls driving through Brattleboro regularly as a med student to visit their wife while she was in school in South Royalton, navigating those roads in snow and dark at 30 mph; they were not in labor.

• Those drives came rushing back while reading a piece by Dr.
• Corina Tennant.
• The post describes a 23-week delivery after the mother became too unstable to transfer, and another patient who arrived in hemorrhagic shock after a 45-minute ambulance ride, where 30 more minutes likely would have meant death.
• Haeri reports that the Brattleboro Memorial Hospital board voted to close its birthing center within nine months unless emergency funding is secured.
• Rural labor and delivery units are closing at a rate of more than two per month across the United States; BMH reportedly loses about $3.8 million annually providing obstetric services; BMH's primary cesarean rate is just 13% compared with roughly 23% nationally; and Vermont earned an A from March of Dimes for maternal and infant health.
• Haeri argues the issue is not poor quality but an essential service that is fundamentally underfunded.
• Proposed solutions include standby capacity payments for rural obstetric units, Medicaid reimbursement that covers the actual cost of providing maternity care, and virtual maternal-fetal medicine and telehealth infrastructure that lets high-risk patients receive specialty care without leaving the community.

For brands planning a campaign

For a rural health or Medicaid policy campaign, this post pairs a concrete local story with a cost-and-quality frame and specific funding asks. It connects maternity care deserts to policy levers rather than treating closures as inevitable.

Drawing on a Commonwealth Fund brief, they note that more than 32,500 US women experience these complications each year; affected women are 31 times more likely to die within a year of delivery, and their infants nearly four times more likely to die at birth or in the first year; Black mothers face rates about 90% higher than white mothers; and complicated deliveries cost more than twice as much. They read these numbers as downstream effects of fragmented care, delayed access and missed prevention, and point to a Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine presentation in which teleMFM implementation was associated with a 34% reduction in severe maternal morbidity at hospitals that previously had no MFM coverage.

Takes a published brief, pulls out its headline figures in a short bulleted list, then interprets them through clinical practice rather than simply restating the findings.

For brands planning a campaign

For a maternal health telehealth company or Medicaid plan, the workable angle is prevention and high-risk access rather than awareness. Haeri ties specialist coverage to a specific outcome figure, cost data and disparity data, giving a campaign proof points around reducing severe maternal morbidity, avoiding downstream costs and closing racial gaps.

Examples: Source 1

The post acknowledges the reported $3.8 million annual loss on obstetric services but broadens the balance sheet to include mothers hemorrhaging on long ambulance transfers, families who decide not to settle in communities without maternity care, and health systems losing the lifelong patient relationships that often begin in the delivery room.

• They note that Brattleboro's primary cesarean rate is about 13% against roughly 23% nationally and that Vermont earned an A from March of Dimes, arguing the problem is underfunding rather than quality.
• Proposed fixes are specific: standby capacity payments for rural obstetric units, Medicaid reimbursement that covers the actual cost of maternity care, and virtual maternal-fetal medicine and telehealth so high-risk patients receive specialist care without leaving their community.

For brands planning a campaign

A payer, health system or telehealth vendor working on maternity care deserts can align with Haeri around payment reform and virtual specialty infrastructure. The post names the funding mechanisms it wants, so a campaign showing how a product or program supports capacity payments, cost-covering reimbursement or virtual MFM will read as a solution rather than a generic rural-health appeal.

Examples: Source 1

Citing the Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health's state report cards, where the national grade moved from C- to C, they acknowledge modest progress and argue that screening without timely treatment identifies a problem without solving it. They call for behavioral health clinicians to be embedded in the perinatal care team, working alongside obstetricians, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, nurses and care coordinators, and point to the behavioral health team at Ouma Health, led by Lauren Hays, as an example of that integration.

Uses a report-card grade change to establish progress and shortfall, then moves straight to the operational fix.

For brands planning a campaign

A plan or vendor selling perinatal behavioral health or integrated care can use Haeri's argument that screening alone fails. Lead with embedded clinicians and closed referral loops into treatment, not screening tools or referral volume.

Examples: Source 1

The figures they highlight: $977.5 million raised, but 52% of capital going to just three companies; 34.6% of active startups focused on general wraparound support such as coaches, classes and doulas; only about 34% of startups whose services could reasonably accept Medicaid actually doing so; and only one in six mentioning health equity or one in five mentioning maternal mortality on their websites.

• They argue that the shortage is not digital health apps but high-risk clinical care where it is needed; wellness platforms and direct-to-consumer maternity apps largely serve commercial and employer-sponsored populations, while the crisis sits in rural communities, maternity care deserts and safety-net populations covered by Medicaid, falling hardest on Black birthing people, who they say are 2.6 times more likely to die of pregnancy-related causes.
• They note that Ouma Health deliberately did not take the venture route and describe the choice as practicing medicine rather than wellness.

For brands planning a campaign

For a Medicaid health plan, FQHC or rural health system, this post is close to a direct pitch: Haeri positions relationship-based subspecialty clinical care for safety-net populations as the differentiator and explicitly invites those buyer types to get in touch. Campaigns built on broad wellness or employer-population messaging will not match this framing.

Examples: Source 1

They cite a study presented with Penn colleagues at the SMFM Annual Meeting: out of 6,403 scans, MFM review identified a potential missed diagnosis in 34.5% of studies previously called normal, with cardiac anomalies among the most commonly missed findings.

• The post lists operating terms: 100% MFM interpretation, licensure in all 50 states, 24-hour routine turnaround, STAT reads within two hours at no additional charge, no subscriptions, account management or setup fees, and patients keeping their existing billing relationship.
• Listed customers include community midwives attending home births, birth centers, mobile imaging companies crossing state lines, independent OB/GYN practices, large women's health MSOs and health systems.

This post stands apart from the others in the reviewed set: it shifts from policy advocacy to service description and a direct call to practices. It is the only post that spells out turnaround times, licensing and fee structure.

For brands planning a campaign

This is the most commercially explicit material in the reviewed set: a telehealth subspecialty read service with published service terms and a named customer mix. A brand, distributor or practice evaluating a partnership, referral arrangement or co-marketing should expect a campaign framed around diagnostic accuracy and access, backed by missed-diagnosis data rather than reach or audience size.

Examples: Source 1

They open with the problem in a line or two, anchor it to a named external source (a Commonwealth Fund publication, a JAMA Health Forum study, a Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health report card, a physician-authored news piece), list the decisive figures as bullets, then interpret them from the perspective of a practicing maternal-fetal medicine physician before closing with a policy prescription or an invitation to a specific buyer type.

• Personal detail is used sparingly and only to set up the clinical point, such as recalling winter drives through Vermont as a medical student.
• The register is first-person professional advocacy.
• Recurring arguments: access to subspecialty care should not depend on geography, insurance or having an MFM down the hall, and screening, referral or an app alone does not constitute care.

For brands planning a campaign

Brands should expect a collaborator who grounds content in third-party research and clinical outcomes rather than product enthusiasm. Briefs with credible data and a defined clinical use case will fit this format; lifestyle, general-wellness or reach-led angles will not.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4 · Source 5

The maternal-fetal medicine telehealth practice provides virtual specialist care and MFM interpretation of ultrasound scans, focusing on high-risk pregnancies and safety-net populations, including Medicaid health plans, FQHCs, and rural health systems.

View example

Like Haeri, they frame rural maternity closures as an underfunding and access problem rather than a local failure, and write in the first person from inside the work they describe.

Galindo focuses on the rural health workforce, education pipelines and convenings for workforce and community partners. Their writing rarely draws on clinical study data and does not cover obstetric care or telehealth delivery, so ask whether their recommendations fit your clinical or delivery goals.

Read original · Original 2

Haeri makes a similar structural argument about maternal care.

Belkin writes about staffing, recruiting and workforce strategy, covering clinician supply, retention and locums across many specialties.

• Haeri writes from clinical practice about maternal-fetal medicine, telehealth and Medicaid-covered populations.
• Both diagnose a system problem but recommend different work.

Read original · Original 2

Both write in the first person and tie health equity to a system change they are personally trying to make.

Adenipekun focuses on patient advocacy, trauma recovery, racial health equity and community voice, often through personal narrative and a book. Haeri focuses on obstetric clinical care and telehealth, using published figures and clinical outcomes rather than lived-experience narrative.

Read original · Original 2

Their posts show the rural-health network and convening language a plan needs to assemble partners: the conference post frames California as a rural state where 57 of 58 counties contain rural communities, reports a 2,000-bed behavioral health shortage, 24 counties with no beds, and only 15 with adolescent beds, and shows them connecting hospital, state agency, library, and university people in the room.

• The collaboration post names the actual partner set a rural workforce effort runs on — medical societies, foundations, colleges, hospitals, community organizations, and the North Valley Health Education Foundation — and asks directly about workforce development, scholarships, and rural health education.
• If the maternal-health campaign's real blocker is that no one can staff or sustain the service after the pilot, Galindo addresses that layer of the same decision and can convene the referral and workforce partners the plan would need anyway.

The tradeoff is clinical specificity.

• Galindo's posts carry access, workforce, and collaboration arguments but say nothing about maternal outcomes, severe maternal morbidity figures, maternal-fetal medicine operating terms (turnaround times, licensure, STAT reads), or Medicaid-plan or maternal-clinical buyer framing.
• A plan using Galindo would still need an MFM or maternal-care voice to supply the outcome claim and intervention design; Galindo fills the delivery and partnership gap, not the clinical one.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

Their posts speak to exactly that failure mode: proactive workforce planning means forecasting demand by service line, tracking retirement and attrition, and building pipelines before gaps appear rather than filling them after they turn urgent.

• The burnout post gives the specialties a maternal-health plan would care about, reporting roughly 50% physician burnout in 2024-2025 with OB-GYN above 50%, and argues that flexible models (locums, PRN, rapid-response, fractional) should be structural rather than a stopgap.
• Same campaign decision: if a rural site cannot staff or retain obstetric and MFM coverage, no amount of virtual interpretation capacity fixes it, and Belkin addresses that layer in the buyer's operational language.

The tradeoff is that Belkin's framing is staffing and recruiting, not maternal clinical care.

• Their posts contain no severe maternal morbidity or maternal mortality figures, no Medicaid maternal-care context, and no clinical intervention design; the outcome language is access, continuity, revenue stability, and the triple aim.
• A plan using Belkin for a maternal-mortality campaign would get the workforce mechanics and still need a clinical voice for the intervention and the measure.
• The '22 years, 80% of my clients' claim is self-reported in the post and should be treated as the author's own characterization rather than a verified figure.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

Their posts are built on that problem: most community engagement in healthcare stops at listening — a survey, a focus group, a write-up, then everyone moves on — and for people who have already had to fight to be believed, that silence confirms their experience does not move anything.

• The advocacy post shows the lived-experience grounding a plan would be buying: a mother lost to cancer, and later Adenipekun's own cancer and a late sister's diagnosis revealing racial inequities in the health system, with a book, Navigating Your New Normal, and a patient-advocacy focus.
• Same campaign decision: a plan can have MFM capacity and Medicaid coverage in place and still reach few members if engagement and cultural safety are handled badly, and that is the layer Adenipekun speaks to.

The tradeoff is distance from the clinical and procurement decision.

• Adenipekun's posts give no maternal care delivery detail, no maternal-fetal medicine or telehealth operating terms, and no Medicaid plan, FQHC, or rural health system buyer framing; the event and venue context is community engagement and NHS Wales rather than U.S. health-plan purchasing.
• A plan would use Adenipekun to design the trust and engagement layer around a pilot, not to source the clinical intervention or produce the outcome measure.
• Ask a clinical partner to supply the intervention and outcome measure.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2