Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31320339›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2019

Expectations and experiences of hospital postnatal care in the UK: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.

Reem Malouf, Jane Henderson, Fiona Alderdice

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Australian Women's Experiences of Establishing Breastfeeding after Caesarean Birth.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Positive postpartum well-being: What works for women.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Reem MaloufNuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK.
Jane HendersonNuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK.
Fiona AlderdiceNuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo report on women's and families' expectations and experiences of hospital postnatal care, and also to reflect on women's satisfaction with hospital postnatal care and to relate their expectations to their actual care experiences.

designSystematic review.

settingUK.

participantsPostnatal women. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Women's and families' expectations, experiences and satisfaction with hospital postnatal care.

methodsEmbase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL Plus), Science Citation Index, and Social Sciences Citation Index were searched to identify relevant studies published since 1970. We incorporated findings from qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies. Eligible studies were independently screened and quality-assessed using a modified version of the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for quantitative studies and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for qualitative studies. Data were extracted on participants' characteristics, study period, setting, study objective and study specified outcomes, in addition to the summary of results.

resultsData were included from 53 studies, of which 28 were quantitative, 19 were qualitative and 6 were mixed-methods studies. The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed, and only three were completely free from bias. Women were generally satisfied with their hospital postnatal care but were critical of staff interaction, the ward environment and infant feeding support. Ethnic minority women were more critical of hospital postnatal care than white women. Although duration of postnatal stay has declined over time, women were generally happy with this aspect of their care. There was limited evidence regarding women's expectations of postnatal care, families' experience and social disadvantage.

conclusionWomen were generally positive about their experiences of hospital postnatal care, but improvements could still be made. Individualised, flexible models of postnatal care should be evaluated and implemented. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017057913.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionQuality of Health CareFemaleHealth Facility EnvironmentHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHospital-Patient RelationsHumansObstetrics and Gynecology Department, HospitalPostnatal CarePregnancyQualitative ResearchUnited Kingdompostnatal caresystematic reviewwomen’s experience

Identifiers

PMID31320339
PMCPMC6661900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.