ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2013
A qualitative interview study exploring pregnant women's and health professionals' attitudes to external cephalic version.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Just do the ECV, Just do it - This, I call it a Miracle:" Understanding External Cephalic Version Practices at the Largest Teaching Hospital in Ghana.Research square · 2025Article
- Patient and Provider Perspectives on Cesarean Delivery Pain and Anesthesia Experiences: A Qualitative Study.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Article
- The feasibility of team care for women seeking to plan a vaginal breech birth (OptiBreech 1): an observational implementation feasibility study in preparation for a pilot trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Factors Associated with Attempted External Cephalic Version for Fetal Malpresentation at Term.AJP reports · 2019Article
- Association Between Attempted External Cephalic Version and Perinatal Morbidity and Mortality.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Article
- This baby is not for turning: Women's experiences of attempted external cephalic version.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2016Article
- The OptiBreech Trial Feasibility Study: A Qualitative Inventory of the Roles and Responsibilities of Breech Specialist Midwives.Journal of midwifery & women's healthArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen who have a breech presentation at term have to decide whether to attempt external cephalic version (ECV) and how they want to give birth if the baby remains breech, either by planned caesarean section (CS) or vaginal breech birth. The aim of this study was to explore the attitudes of women with a breech presentation and health professionals who manage breech presentation to ECV.
methodsWe carried out semi-structured interviews with pregnant women with a breech presentation (n=11) and health professionals who manage breech presentation (n=11) recruited from two hospitals in North East England. We used purposive sampling to include women who chose ECV and women who chose planned CS. We analysed data using thematic analysis, comparing between individuals and seeking out disconfirming cases.
resultsFour main themes emerged from the data collected during interviews with pregnant women with a breech presentation: ECV as a means of enabling natural birth; concerns about ECV; lay and professional accounts of ECV; and breech presentation as a means of choosing planned CS. Some women's attitudes to ECV were affected by their preferences for how to give birth. Other women chose CS because ECV was not acceptable to them. Two main themes emerged from the interview data about health professionals' attitudes towards ECV: directive counselling and attitudes towards lay beliefs about ECV and breech presentation.
conclusionsWomen had a range of attitudes to ECV informed by their preferences for how to give birth; the acceptability of ECV to them; and lay accounts of ECV, which were frequently negative. Most professionals described having a preference for ECV and reported directively counselling women to choose it. Some professionals were dismissive of lay beliefs about ECV. Some key challenges for shared decision making about breech presentation were identified: health professionals counselling women directively about ECV and the differences between evidence-based information about ECV and lay beliefs. To address these challenges a number of approaches will be required.
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.