Conclusions:
In a unique setting—a live three-day meeting attended by highly-engaged, knowledgeable professionals and prinPI’s in stillbirth research, with extensive consensus procedure experience—six markers for identification of near-misses in stillbirth studies were agreed upon. The importance of establishing a standardized list of surrogate markers for use by all research groups was recognized. Some limitations should be acknowledged: most participants were from high-income countries. Also, adverse events related to interventions leading to unnecessary preterm birth are not captured in this procedure. When risk prediction for stillbirth is accurate and is paired with effective interventions, stillbirth will be prevented. From the perspective of a screening study, a successful prediction-prevention coupling changes a true-positive to a false-positive, and could result in rejecting successful approaches.(5) We believe the current near-miss stillbirth outcome set is a step closer to appropriate recognition of those pregnancies in which a stillbirth was a near-miss.