ArticleBMJ open2020
Women and partners' experiences of critical perinatal events: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mother-newborn couplet care and the expectations, concerns and educational needs of healthcare professionals: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Using complaints from obstetric care for improving women's birth experiences - a cross sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to explore women and partners' experiences following critical perinatal events.
designThis is a qualitative interview study. We conducted semistructured individual interviews with women and their partners in separate rooms. Interviews were analysed thematically and validated by a transdisciplinary group of anthropologists, obstetricians and a midwife.
settingDepartment of obstetrics at a tertiary referral university hospital in Denmark.
participantsWomen and partners who had experienced a critical perinatal event within the past 3-12 months.
resultsWe conducted 17 interviews and identified three main themes: (1) ambivalence towards medicalisation, (2) the extended temporality of a critical birth and (3) postnatal loss of attention from healthcare professionals. Overall, participants expressed a high degree of trust in and quality of provided healthcare during the critical perinatal events. They experienced medicalisation (obstetric interventions) as a necessity, linking them to the safety of the child and their new role as responsible parents. However, some women experienced disempowerment when healthcare professionals overlooked their ability to stay actively involved during birth events. Postnatally, women and their partners experienced shortages of healthcare professional resources, absent healthcare and lack of attention.
conclusionsWomen and their partners' experiences of critical perinatal events begin long before and end long after the actual moment of childbirth, challenging conventional ideas about the birth as being the pivotal event in making families. In future healthcare planning, it is important to to align expectations and guide parental involvement in birth events and to acknowledge the postnatal period as equally crucial.
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.