ArticleThe Journal of perinatal education2014
Healthy birth practice #4: avoid interventions unless they are medically necessary.
Article in The Journal of perinatal education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Self-Reported Physical Fitness during Late Pregnancy with Birth Outcomes and Oxytocin Administration during Labour-The GESTAFIT Project.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- A concept analysis of the term midwifery intervention: A scoping review.European journal of midwifery · 2026Review
- Sacred space: a qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis of women's experiences of supportive birthing environments.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Article
- Outcomes of Childbirth Education for Women With Pregnancy Complications.The Journal of perinatal education · 2023Article
- Women's experiences with implementation of the physiologic birth program in Iran: a qualitative content analysis study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2023Article
- Experiences of health providers regarding implementation of the physiologic birth program in Iran: A qualitative content analysis.PloS one · 2023Article
- Factors Associated With Normal Physiologic Birth for Women Who Labor In Water: A Secondary Analysis of A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of midwifery & women's health · 2022Observational
- COVID-19 Pandemic and Birth Experience. The Monopoly of Caesarean Sections. A Critical Realist Review.Maedica · 2021Article
- Respectful midwifery care during the COVID-19 pandemic.European journal of midwifery · 2020Article
- Relation between Length of Exposure to Epidural Analgesia during Labour and Birth Mode.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maternity care in the United States is intervention intensive. The routine use of intravenous fluids, restrictions on eating and drinking, continuous electronic fetal monitoring, epidural analgesia, and augmentation of labor characterize most U.S. births. The use of episiotomy is far from restrictive. These interventions disturb the normal physiology of labor and birth and restrict women's ability to cope with labor. The result is a cascade of interventions that increase risk, including the risk of cesarean surgery, for women and babies. This article is an updated evidence-based review of the "Lamaze International Care Practices That Promote Normal Birth, Care Practice #4: No Routine Interventions," published in The Journal of Perinatal Education, 16(3), 2007.
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.