SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2016
A systematic review to examine the evidence regarding discussions by midwives, with women, around their options for where to give birth.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Women's experiences of decision-making and informed choice about pregnancy and birth care: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Pooled it
- What influences birth place preferences, choices and decision-making amongst healthy women with straightforward pregnancies in the UK? A qualitative evidence synthesis using a 'best fit' framework approach.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Pooled it
- The relationship between ethnicity and place of birth in England: a mixed-methods study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Planned hospital birth compared with planned home birth for pregnant women at low risk of complications.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Article
- Global stakeholder perspectives of home birth: a systematic scoping review.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Factors influencing the utilisation of free-standing and alongside midwifery units in England: a qualitative research study.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Article
- Exploring women's preferences for birth settings in England: A discrete choice experiment.PloS one · 2019Article
- 'I didn't think you were allowed that, they didn't mention that.' A qualitative study exploring women's perceptions of home birth.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2018Article
- Birthplace choices: what are the information needs of women when choosing where to give birth in England? A qualitative study using online and face to face focus groups.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2018Article
- Women's motivations for choosing a high risk birth setting against medical advice in the Netherlands: a qualitative analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiscussion of place of birth is important for women and maternity services, yet the detail, content and delivery of these discussions are unclear. The Birthplace Study found that for low risk, multiparous women, there was no significant difference in neonatal safety outcomes between women giving birth in obstetric units, midwifery-led units, or home. For low risk, nulliparous women giving birth in a midwifery-led unit was as safe as in hospital, whilst birth at home was associated with a small, increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. Intervention rates were reduced in all settings outside hospital. NICE guidelines recommend all women are supported in their choice of birth setting. Midwives have the opportunity to provide information to women about where they choose to give birth. However, research suggests women are sometimes unaware of all the options available. This systematic review will establish what is known about midwives' perspectives of discussions with women about their options for where to give birth and whether any interventions have been implemented to support these discussions.
methodsThe systematic review was PROSPERO registered (registration number: CRD42015017334). The PRISMA statement was followed. Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Popline and EMBASE databases were searched between 2000-March 2015 and grey literature was searched. All identified studies were screened for inclusion. Qualitative data was thematically analysed, whilst quantitative data was summarised.
resultsThe themes identified relating to influences on midwives' place of birth discussions with women were organisational pressures and professional norms, inadequate knowledge and confidence of midwives, variation in what midwives told women and the influence of colleagues. None of the interventions identified provided sufficient evidence of effectiveness and were of poor quality.
conclusionsThe review has suggested the need for a pragmatic, understandable place of birth dialogue containing standard content to ensure midwives provide low risk women with adequate information about their place of birth options and the need to improve midwives knowledge about place of birth. A more robust, systematic evaluation of any interventions designed is required to improve the quality of place of birth discussions. By engaging with co-produced research, more effective interventions can be designed, implemented and sustained.
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.