Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31182118›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2019

The Giving Voice to Mothers study: inequity and mistreatment during pregnancy and childbirth in the United States.

Saraswathi Vedam, Kathrin Stoll, Tanya Khemet Taiwo, Nicholas Rubashkin, Melissa Cheyney, Nan Strauss, Monica McLemore, Micaela Cadena, Elizabeth Nethery, Eleanor Rushton and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06926504 (TeamBirth - an Intervention to Improve Patient Safety and Person-centered Care During Childbirth), which is not on this map. Cited by 344 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
344citing papers in PubMed, 9 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.

NCT06926504 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

TeamBirth - an Intervention to Improve Patient Safety and Person-centered Care During Childbirth

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorKarolinska InstitutetRan2024 to 2029Enrolled800,000ConditionsPerson Centered Care, Patient Safety, Patient SatisfactionArmsThe care process S-TeamBirth, S-TeamBirth
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

344 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Global prevalence and risk factors of obstetric violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 'Uncooperative' Labouring Women: The Moral Judgement Embedded in Modern Obstetrics.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

284 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

13 authors.

Saraswathi VedamBirth Place Lab, Division of Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada), E416 Shaughnessy (Mailbox 80), 4500 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3N1, Canada. saraswathi.vedam@ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6396-3638
Kathrin StollBirth Place Lab, Division of Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada), E416 Shaughnessy (Mailbox 80), 4500 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3N1, Canada.
Tanya Khemet TaiwoUniversity of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, California, USA.
Nicholas RubashkinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California San Francisco and the Institute for Global Health Sciences, California, USA.
Melissa CheyneyDepartment of Anthropology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Nan StraussEvery Mother Counts, New York City, USA.
Monica McLemoreDepartment of Family Health Care Nursing and ANSIRH Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Micaela CadenaYoung Women United, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Elizabeth NetherySchool of Population & Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Eleanor RushtonBirth Place Lab, Division of Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada), E416 Shaughnessy (Mailbox 80), 4500 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3N1, Canada.
Laura SchummersDepartment of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Eugene DeclercqSchool of Public Health, Boston University, Massachusetts, Boston, USA.
GVtM-US Steering Council

Funding

New Hampshire Charitable Foundation Transforming Birth Fund 111794
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecently WHO researchers described seven dimensions of mistreatment in maternity care that have adverse impacts on quality and safety. Applying the WHO framework for quality care, service users partnered with NGOs, clinicians, and researchers, to design and conduct the Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM)-US study.

methodsOur multi-stakeholder team distributed an online cross-sectional survey to capture lived experiences of maternity care in diverse populations. Patient-designed items included indicators of verbal and physical abuse, autonomy, discrimination, failure to meet professional standards of care, poor rapport with providers, and poor conditions in the health system. We quantified the prevalence of mistreatment by race, socio-demographics, mode of birth, place of birth, and context of care, and describe the intersectional relationships between these variables.

resultsOf eligible participants (n = 2700), 2138 completed all sections of the survey. One in six women (17.3%) reported experiencing one or more types of mistreatment such as: loss of autonomy; being shouted at, scolded, or threatened; and being ignored, refused, or receiving no response to requests for help. Context of care (e.g. mode of birth; transfer; difference of opinion) correlated with increased reports of mistreatment. Experiences of mistreatment differed significantly by place of birth: 5.1% of women who gave birth at home versus 28.1% of women who gave birth at the hospital. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of mistreatment included having a vaginal birth, a community birth, a midwife, and being white, multiparous, and older than 30 years. Rates of mistreatment for women of colour were consistently higher even when examining interactions between race and other maternal characteristics. For example, 27.2% of women of colour with low SES reported any mistreatment versus 18.7% of white women with low SES. Regardless of maternal race, having a partner who was Black also increased reported mistreatment.

conclusionThis is the first study to use indicators developed by service users to describe mistreatment in childbirth in the US. Our findings suggest that mistreatment is experienced more frequently by women of colour, when birth occurs in hospitals, and among those with social, economic or health challenges. Mistreatment is exacerbated by unexpected obstetric interventions, and by patient-provider disagreements.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude of Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth FacilitiesHealth PersonnelHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaternal Health ServicesMothersParturitionPhysical AbusePregnancyQuality of Health CareSocial StigmaUnited StatesAbuseChildbirthDisrespectHealth equityHome birthHospital birthMidwiferyMistreatmentParticipatory researchPregnancyQuality measureRaceRespectful maternity care

Identifiers

PMID31182118
PMCPMC6558766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.