Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33752712›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2021

The development of the WHO Labour Care Guide: an international survey of maternity care providers.

Veronica Pingray, Mercedes Bonet, Mabel Berrueta, Agustina Mazzoni, María Belizán, Netanya Keil, Joshua Vogel, Fernando Althabe, Olufemi T Oladapo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Promoting respectful maternity care with the WHO labor care guide and the checklist mnemonic "COPE": A quality improvement project.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Effectiveness of dissemination strategies of maternal clinical guidelines: A narrative review.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

9 authors.

Veronica PingrayDepartment of Mother and Child Health Research, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina. vpingray@iecs.org.ar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7889-2825
Mercedes BonetUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Mabel BerruetaDepartment of Mother and Child Health Research, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustina MazzoniDepartment of Mother and Child Health Research, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
María BelizánDepartment of Mother and Child Health Research, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Netanya KeilNew York University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Joshua VogelMaternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Fernando AlthabeUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Olufemi T OladapoUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001World Health Organization 2019/921748-0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe partograph is the most commonly used labour monitoring tool in the world. However, it has been used incorrectly or inconsistently in many settings. In 2018, a WHO expert group reviewed and revised the design of the partograph in light of emerging evidence, and they developed the first version of the Labour Care Guide (LCG). The objective of this study was to explore opinions of skilled health personnel on the first version of the WHO Labour Care Guide.

methodsSkilled health personnel (including obstetricians, midwives and general practitioners) of any gender from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America were identified through a large global research network. Country coordinators from the network invited 5 to 10 mid-level and senior skilled health personnel who had worked in labour wards anytime in the last 5 years. A self-administered, anonymous, structured, online questionnaire including closed and open-ended questions was designed to assess the clarity, relevance, appropriateness of the frequency of recording, and the completeness of the sections and variables on the LCG.

resultsA total of 110 participants from 23 countries completed the survey between December 2018 and January 2019. Variables included in the LCG were generally considered clear, relevant and to have been recorded at the appropriate frequency. Most sections of the LCG were considered complete. Participants agreed or strongly agreed with the overall design, structure of the LCG, and the usefulness of reference thresholds to trigger further assessment and actions. They also agreed that LCG could potentially have a positive impact on clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care. Participants disagreed with the value of some variables, including coping, urine, and neonatal status.

conclusionsFuture end-users of WHO Labour Care Guide considered the variables to be clear, relevant and appropriate, and, with minor improvements, to have the potential to positively impact clinical decision-making and respectful maternity care.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicLabor, ObstetricAfricaAsiaChildDelivery, ObstetricEuropeFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInfant, NewbornLatin AmericaMaleMaternal Health ServicesObstetric Labor ComplicationsPregnancyChildbirthIntrapartum careLabourPartographWHO labour care guide

Identifiers

PMID33752712
PMCPMC7986022

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.