ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2015
Quality of prenatal care questionnaire: psychometric testing in an Australia population.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Racial microaggressions in prenatal care settings and perceived quality of prenatal care among Black/African American women.BMC public health · 2026Article
- PANDA e-health system as a tool to increase antenatal contacts and improve perinatal outcomes in Tanzania: adaptation and feasibility study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Adaptation of the "Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire" (QPCQ) Into Turkish: A Validity and Reliability Study.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Magnitude, disparity, and predictors of poor-quality antenatal care service: A systematic review and meta-analysis.SAGE open medicine · 2024Review
- Improving prenatal care during lockdown: Comparing telehealth and in-person care for low-risk pregnant women in the PROTECT pilot study.Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction · 2022Article
- Postpartum depression and its correlates: a cross-sectional study in southeast Iran.BMC women's health · 2022Article
- Assessing Perception of Prenatal Care Quality Among Black Women in the United States.Journal of midwifery & women's health · 2022Article
- Quality of antenatal care and its sociodemographic determinants: results of the 2015 Pelotas birth cohort, Brazil.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Access to and Quality of Healthcare for Pregnant and Postpartum Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Frontiers in global women's health · 2021Article
- Patient Satisfaction with Health Care Services; An Application of Physician's Behavior as a Moderator.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ).Revista de saude publica · 2018Article
- Understanding the Allocation of Caesarean Outcome to Provider Type: A Chart Review.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2018Article
- Optimizing Gestational Weight Gain With the Eating4Two Smartphone App: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe quality of antenatal care is recognized as critical to the effectiveness of care in optimizing maternal and child health outcomes. However, research has been hindered by the lack of a theoretically-grounded and psychometrically sound instrument to assess the quality of antenatal care. In response to this need, the 46-item Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ) was developed and tested in a Canadian context. The objective of this study was to validate the QPCQ and to establish its internal consistency reliability in an Australian population.
methodsStudy participants were recruited from two public maternity services in two Australian states: Monash Health, Victoria and Wollongong Hospital, New South Wales. Women were eligible to participate if they had given birth to a single live infant, were 18 years or older, had at least three antenatal visits during the pregnancy, and could speak, read and write English. Study questionnaires were completed in hospital. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted. Construct validity, including convergent validity, was further assessed against existing questionnaires: the Patient Expectations and Satisfaction with Prenatal Care (PESPC) and the Prenatal Interpersonal Processes of Care (PIPC). Internal consistency reliability of the QPCQ and each of its six subscales was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.
resultsTwo hundred and ninety-nine women participated in the study. CFA verified and confirmed the six factors (subscales) of the QPCQ. A hypothesis-testing approach and an assessment of convergent validity further supported construct validity of the instrument. The QPCQ had acceptable internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.97), as did each of the six factors (Cronbach's alpha = 0.74 to 0.95).
conclusionsThe QPCQ is a valid and reliable self-report measure of antenatal care quality. This instrument fills a scientific gap and can be used in research to examine relationships between the quality of antenatal care and outcomes of interest, and to examine variations in antenatal care quality. It also will be useful in quality assurance and improvement initiatives.
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.