Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24304970›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Managing the pain of labour: factors associated with the use of labour pain management for pregnant Australian women.

Amie Steel, Jon Adams, David Sibbritt, Alex Broom, Cindy Gallois, Jane Frawley

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A Cross-Sectional Survey of Labor Pain Control and Women's Satisfaction.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amie SteelAustralian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, UTS, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
Jon AdamsAustralian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, UTS, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
David SibbrittAustralian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, UTS, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
Alex BroomSchool of Social Science, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia.
Cindy GalloisSchool of Psychology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia.
Jane FrawleyAustralian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, UTS, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
University of Technology Sydney · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite high rates of women's use of intrapartum pain management techniques, little is known about the factors that influence such use.

objectiveExamine the determinants associated with women's use of labour pain management.

designCross-sectional survey of a substudy of women from the 'young' cohort of the Australian Longitudinal Study of Women's Health (ALSWH). SETTING AND

participantsWomen aged 31-35 years who identified as being pregnant or recently given birth in the 2009 ALSWH survey (n = 2445) were recruited for the substudy. The substudy survey was completed by 1835 women (RR = 79.2%). MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED: Determinants examined included pregnancy health and maternity care [including complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)] for their most recent pregnancy and any previous pregnancies. Participants' attitudes and beliefs related to both CAM and maternity care were also included in the analysis.

main outcome measuresThe outcome measures examined were the use of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management techniques (NPMT).

resultsDifferences were seen in the effects of demographics, health service utilization, health status, use of CAM, and attitudes and beliefs upon use of intrapartum pain management techniques across all categories. The only variable that was identified as a determinant for use of all types of pain management techniques was a previous caesarean section (CS). DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsThe effect of key determinants on women's use of pain management techniques differs significantly, and, other than CS, no one determinant is clearly influential in the use of all pain management options.

Indexed as

AdultAustraliaChoice BehaviorComplementary TherapiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLabor PainLongitudinal StudiesPain ManagementPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePrenatal Carecomplementary and alternative medicinedeterminantsobstetric anaesthesiaobstetric analgesiapregnancy

Identifiers

PMID24304970
PMCPMC5060859
OpenAlexW2107875268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.