ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018
Influences on birth spacing intentions and desired interventions among women who have experienced a poor obstetric outcome in Lilongwe Malawi: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02674542 (Family Planning Intentions and Practices Among Women Who Have Experienced a Poor Obstetric Outcome), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Family Planning Intentions and Practices Among Women Who Have Experienced a Poor Obstetric Outcome: a Qualitative Study
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Family planning practice among women living with human immunodeficiency virus in Magway, Myanmar: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Short interpregnancy interval following reproductive coercion: A prospective cohort study of pregnant Ethiopian women.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Who is most vulnerable? Factors associated with presenting to antenatal care without a male partner in Northern Tanzania.Midwifery · 2024Article
- Family Planning Beliefs and Their Association with Contraceptive Use Dynamics: Results from a Longitudinal Study in Uganda.Studies in family planning · 2021Article
- Article
- Community-based postpartum contraceptive counselling in rural Nepal: a mixed-methods evaluation.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2020Article
- Article
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
backgroundStillbirth and neonatal mortality are very high in many low-income countries, including Malawi. Use of family planning to encourage birth spacing may optimize outcomes for subsequent pregnancies. However, reproductive desires and influences on birth spacing preferences of women who have experienced a stillbirth or neonatal death in low-resource settings are not well understood.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study using 20 in-depth interviews and four focus group discussions with women who had experienced a stillborn baby or early neonatal death to explore attitudes surrounding birth spacing and potential interventions to promote family planning in this population. Qualitative data were analyzed for recurrent patterns and themes and central ideas were extracted to identify their core meanings.
resultsForty-six women participated in the study. After experiencing a stillbirth or neonatal death, most women wanted to wait to become pregnant again but women with living children wished to wait for longer periods of time than those with no living children. Most women preferred birth spacing interventions led by clinical providers and inclusion of their spouses.
conclusionsMany influences on family size and birth spacing were noted in this population, with the most significant influencing factor being the spouse. Interventions to promote birth spacing and improve maternal and neonatal health in this population need to involve male partners and knowledgeable health care providers to be effective.
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02674542 Registered February 1, 2016 (retrospectively registered).
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.