Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31448884›Full record

ArticleJournal of midwifery & women's health2020

Intrapartum Care and Experiences of Women with Midwives Versus Obstetricians in the Listening to Mothers in California Survey.

Eugene R Declercq, Candice Belanoff, Carol Sakala

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of midwifery & women's health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Impact of Obesity on Childbirth Expectations.Journal of midwifery & women's health
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eugene R DeclercqDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5411-3033
Candice BelanoffDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2491-7548
Carol SakalaNational Partnership for Women & Families, Washington, District of Columbia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0006-347X
Boston University · USNational Partnership for Women & Families · US

Funding

California Health Care Foundation 19555Yellow Chair Foundation 2016-17073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany studies based on hospital records or vital statistics have found that childbearing women experience benefits of lower rates of intervention with midwifery care versus obstetric care during labor and birth. Surveys of women's views and experiences can provide a richer analysis when comparing intrapartum care of midwives and obstetricians.

methodsThis study was a secondary analysis of data from the population-based Listening to Mothers in California survey. The sample, which was representative of 2016 California hospital births, was drawn from birth certificate files and oversampled midwife-attended births. Women responded to the survey in English or Spanish on any device or with a telephone interviewer. The present analysis is based on 1421 of the 2539 participants who identified a midwife or obstetrician as their attendant at a vaginal birth. A bivariate analysis of demographic, attitudinal, and intrapartum variables was conducted. A multivariable model included sociodemographic and attitudinal variables as covariates.

resultsBivariate analyses found significant socioeconomic differences by type of intrapartum care provider, with women in California attended by midwives more likely to be well educated and privately insured than women attended by obstetricians. Women with midwife birth attendants were less likely to report experiencing various intrapartum medical interventions, less likely to experience pressure to have epidural analgesia, and more likely to report that staff encouraged the woman's decision making. Adjusted odds ratios found that women with midwives were less likely to experience medical interventions, including attempted labor induction; labor augmentation; and use of pain medications, epidural analgesia, and intravenous fluids; and less likely to report pressure to have labor induction or epidural analgesia. Women cared for by midwives were more likely to experience any nonpharmacologic pain relief measures and nitrous oxide and to agree that hospital staff encouraged their decision making. DISCUSSION: Using women's own reports of their care experiences and adjusting for possible differences in women's attitudes and case mix, we found that midwifery care of women who had vaginal births was associated with reduced use of medical interventions and increased women's decisional latitude during labor and birth.

Indexed as

CaliforniaCesarean SectionDecision MakingFemaleHumansLabor Stage, ThirdMidwiferyMothersNurse-Patient RelationsObstetric Labor ComplicationsPerinatal CarePractice Patterns, Nurses'PregnancyPregnancy OutcomeCaliforniacertified nurse-midwivesintrapartum caremidwiferymidwivesmothersnurse-midwivesobstetricianobstetricsparturitionsurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID31448884
PMCPMC7028014
OpenAlexW2970342413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.