Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28086823›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2017

A realist review of the partograph: when and how does it work for labour monitoring?

Carol Bedwell, Karen Levin, Celia Pett, Dame Tina Lavender

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Carol BedwellSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. carol.bedwell@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8031-7793
Karen LevinMonitoring and Evaluation, Fistula Care Plus project, EngenderHealth, 440 9th Avenue, New York, NY, 10001, USA.
Celia PettFistula Care Plus project, EngenderHealth, 440 9th Ave, 12th floor, New York, NY, 10001, USA.
Dame Tina LavenderSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe partograph (or partogram) is recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO), for monitoring labour wellbeing and progress. Concerns about limitations in the way the partograph is used in the clinical context and the potential impact on its effectiveness have led to this realist systematic review of partograph use.

methodsThis review aimed to answer two key questions, 1) What is it about the partograph that works (or does not work); for whom does it work; and in what circumstances? 2) What are the essential inputs required for the partograph to work? A comprehensive search strategy encompassed key databases; including papers of varying methodologies. Papers were selected for inclusion if the focus of the paper was the partograph and related to context, mechanism or outcome. Ninety five papers were included for data synthesis. Two authors completed data extraction and synthesis.

resultsThe evidence synthesis relates the evidence to identified theories of health worker acceptability, health system support, effective referral systems, human resources and health worker competence, highlighting barriers and facilitators.

conclusionsThis first comprehensive realist synthesis of the partograph, provides the international community of maternity clinicians with a picture of potential issues and solutions related to successful labour recording and management, which is also translatable to other monitoring approaches.

Indexed as

Labor, ObstetricFemaleFetal MonitoringHumansObstetric Labor ComplicationsPregnancyUterine MonitoringContextLabourOutcomesPartogramPartographUse

Identifiers

PMID28086823
PMCPMC5237234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.