Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32295541›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

Factors associated with provision of smoking cessation support to pregnant women - a cross-sectional survey of midwives in New South Wales, Australia.

Megan E Passey, Jo M Longman, Catherine Adams, Jennifer J Johnston, Jessica Simms, Margaret Rolfe

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Healthcare professionals' experiences of supporting pregnant women with mental illness with their smoking behaviors: a qualitative study.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

Megan E PasseyThe University of Sydney, University Centre for Rural Health, PO Box 3074, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia. megan.passey@sydney.edu.au.
Jo M LongmanThe University of Sydney, University Centre for Rural Health, PO Box 3074, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Catherine AdamsNorthern New South Wales Local Health District, Locked Mail Bag 11, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Jennifer J JohnstonThe University of Sydney, University Centre for Rural Health, PO Box 3074, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Jessica SimmsThe University of Sydney, University Centre for Rural Health, PO Box 3074, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Margaret RolfeThe University of Sydney, University Centre for Rural Health, PO Box 3074, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.

Funding

Cancer Institute NSW 13/ECF/1-11National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia GNT1072213
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmoking is the most important preventable cause of adverse pregnancy outcomes, but provision of smoking cessation support (SCS) to pregnant women is poor. We examined the association between midwives' implementation of SCS (5As - Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange follow-up) and reported barriers/enablers to implementation.

methodsOn-line anonymous survey of midwives providing antenatal care in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, assessing provision of the 5As and barriers/enablers to their implementation, using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Factor analyses identified constructs underlying the 5As; and barriers/enablers. Multivariate general linear models examined relationships between the barrier/enabler factors and the 5As factors.

resultsOf 750 midwives invited, 150 (20%) participated. Respondents more commonly reported Asking and Assessing than Advising, Assisting, or Arranging follow-up (e.g. 77% always Ask smoking status; 17% always Arrange follow-up). Three 5As factors were identified- 'Helping', 'Assessing quitting' and 'Assessing dependence'. Responses to barrier/enabler items showed greater knowledge, skills, intentions, and confidence with Assessment than Assisting; endorsement for SCS as a priority and part of midwives' professional role; and gaps in training and organisational support for SCS. Nine barrier/enabler factors were identified. Of these, the factors of 'Capability' (knowledge, skills, confidence); 'Work Environment' (service has resources, capacity, champions and values SCS) and 'Personal priority' (part of role and a priority) predicted 'Helping'.

conclusionThe TDF enabled systematic identification of barriers to providing SCS, and the multivariate models identified key contributors to poor implementation. Combined with qualitative data, these results have been mapped to intervention components to develop a comprehensive intervention to improve SCS.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMidwiferySmoking CessationCross-Sectional StudiesFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansNew South WalesPregnant PeoplePrenatal CareSurveys and QuestionnairesAntenatal careHealth professional behaviourSmoking cessationTheoretical domains framework

Identifiers

PMID32295541
PMCPMC7161220

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.