SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2012
Professionals' views of fetal monitoring during labour: a systematic review and thematic analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Revisiting the Value of Admission Cardiotocography in Term Pregnancies: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- Breastfeeding experiences and support for women who are overweight or obese: A mixed-methods systematic review.Maternal & child nutrition · 2020Pooled it
- Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Patient and public attitudes to and awareness of clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review with thematic and narrative syntheses.BMC health services research · 2014Pooled it
- A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study of Risk Factors for Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury at a Tertiary Hospital in Japan.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2026Article
- Intersectional dynamics and care disparities in intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring: a socio-technical systems perspective.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Is there a role for oral misoprostol in labor induction for prelabor rupture of membranes at term?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Changes in mental health services in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in high-income countries: a rapid review.BMC psychiatry · 2024Review
- Article
- Can social capital play a role in contracting services of family doctors in China? Reflections based on an integrative review.BMC family practice · 2021Review
- Shared decision-making and maternity care in the deep learning age: Acknowledging and overcoming inherited defeaters.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2021Article
- Perceptions and Opinions of Patients About Mental Health Chatbots: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Clinical Validation of Mobile Cardiotocograph Device for Intrapartum and Antepartum Monitoring Compared to Standard Cardiotocograph: An Inter-Rater Agreement Study.Journal of family & reproductive health · 2019Article
- Family physicians perceived role in perinatal mental health: an integrative review.BMC family practice · 2018Review
- Midwives' perceptions on using a fetoscope and Doppler for fetal heart rate assessments during labor: a qualitative study in rural Tanzania.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2018Article
- Fetal heart rate monitoring: from Doppler to computerized analysis.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2016Review
- Service users' experiences and views of aggressive situations in mental health care: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2015Review
- Intelligent Structured Intermittent Auscultation (ISIA): evaluation of a decision-making framework for fetal heart monitoring of low-risk women.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014Article
- Labor management and neonatal outcomes in cardiotocography categories II and III (Review).Medicine internationalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent recommendations do not support the use of continuous electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for low risk women during labour, yet EFM remains widespread in clinical practice. Consideration of the views, perspectives and experiences of individuals directly concerned with EFM application may be beneficial for identifying barriers to and facilitators for implementing evidence-based maternity care. The aim of this paper is to offer insight and understanding, through systematic review and thematic analysis, of research into professionals' views on fetal heart rate monitoring during labour.
methodsAny study whose aim was to explore professional views of fetal monitoring during labour was considered eligible for inclusion. The electronic databases of MEDLINE (1966-2010), CINAHL (1980-2010), EMBASE (1974-2010) and Maternity and Infant Care: MIDIRS (1971-2010) were searched in January 2010 and an updated search was performed in March 2012. Quality appraisal of each included study was performed. Data extraction tables were developed to collect data. Data synthesis was by thematic analysis.
resultsEleven studies, including 1,194 participants, were identified and included in this review. Four themes emerged from the data: 1) reassurance, 2) technology, 3) communication/education and 4) midwife by proxy.
conclusionThis systematic review and thematic analysis offers insight into some of the views of professionals on fetal monitoring during labour. It provides evidence for the continuing use of EFM when caring for low-risk women, contrary to current research evidence. Further research to ascertain how some of these views might be addressed to ensure the provision of evidence-based care for women and their babies is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.