ArticlePloS one2015
Measuring client experiences in maternity care under change: development of a questionnaire based on the WHO Responsiveness model.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Women's reported experience of respectful maternity care measures worldwide: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient-reported experience measures.Health services research · 2019Pooled it
- Measuring women's childbirth experiences: a systematic review for identification and analysis of validated instruments.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Pooled it
- Effects of a Personal Health Record in Maternity Care: A Stepped-Wedge Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Risk-guided maternity care to enhance maternal empowerment postpartum: A cluster randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Assessing women's perspective of the quality of care of the childbirth experience at a tertiary care hospital in Egypt: An application of the WHO standards-based tool.Journal of public health research · 2025Article
- Interprofessional Collaboration in Obstetric and Midwifery Care-Multigroup Comparison of Midwives' and Physicians' Perspective.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Migrant women's experience of antenatal care in an urban and rural setting in north and North-West Thailand: A cross sectional survey.Journal of migration and health · 2025Article
- Beyond survival: The impact of birth complications on postpartum wellbeing for mothers, babies, and households in Kenya.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Childbirth experience assessment tools based on COSMIN guidelines: A systematic review.International journal of nursing sciences · 2025Review
- Experienced disrespect & abuse during childbirth and associated birth characteristics: a cross-sectional survey in the Netherlands.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Measuring women's experiences during antenatal care (ANC): scoping review of measurement tools.Reproductive health · 2023Article
- Measuring women's empowerment during the perinatal period in high income countries: A scoping review of instruments used.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Patient-reported outcome and experience measures for quality improvement in pregnancy and childbirth care: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Approaches and geographical locations of respectful maternity care research: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Assessment of interprofessional obstetric and midwifery care from the midwives' perspective using the Interprofessional Collaboration Scale (ICS).Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Client-care provider interaction during labour and birth as experienced by women: Respect, communication, confidentiality and autonomy.PloS one · 2021Article
- Maternal health literacy on mother and child health care: A community cluster survey in two southern provinces in Laos.PloS one · 2021Article
- Study design of a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of a locally tailored approach for preconception care - the APROPOS-II study.BMC public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMaternity care is an integrated care process, which consists of different services, involves different professionals and covers different time windows. To measure performance of maternity care based on clients' experiences, we developed and validated a questionnaire. METHODS AND
findingsWe used the 8-domain WHO Responsiveness model, and previous materials to develop a self-report questionnaire. A dual study design was used for development and validation. Content validity of the ReproQ-version-0 was determined through structured interviews with 11 pregnant women (≥28 weeks), 10 women who recently had given birth (≤12 weeks), and 19 maternity care professionals. Structured interviews established the domain relevance to the women; all items were separately commented on. All Responsiveness domains were judged relevant, with Dignity and Communication ranking highest. Main missing topic was the assigned expertise of the health professional. After first adaptation, construct validity of the ReproQ-version-1 was determined through a web-based survey. Respondents were approached by maternity care organizations with different levels of integration of services of midwives and obstetricians. We sent questionnaires to 605 third trimester pregnant women (response 65%), and 810 women 6 weeks after delivery (response 55%). Construct validity was based on: response patterns; exploratory factor analysis; association of the overall score with a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), known group comparisons. Median overall ReproQ score was 3.70 (range 1-4) showing good responsiveness. The exploratory factor analysis supported the assumed domain structure and suggested several adaptations. Correlation of the VAS rating and overall ReproQ score (antepartum, postpartum) supported validity (r = 0.56; 0.59, p<0.001 Spearman's correlation coefficient). Pre-stated group comparisons confirmed the expected difference following a good vs. adverse birth outcome. Fully integrated organizations performed slightly better (median = 3.78) than less integrated organizations (median = 3.63; p<0.001). Participation rate of women with a low educational level and/or a non-western origin was low.
conclusionsThe ReproQ appears suitable for assessing quality of maternity care from the clients' perspective. Recruitment of disadvantaged groups requires additional non-digital approaches.
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.