ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2021
Slovenian midwifery professionalization: Perception of midwives and related health professions.
Article in European journal of midwifery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Competency Goals in Midwifery Master's Programs in Germany and Selected OECD Countries: Comparison of Stakeholder Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Professional Autonomy, Burnout, and Intentions to Leave the Profession Among Spanish Midwives: A Qualitative Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Transitioning to midwifery models of care: lessons from case studies in India.Global health action · 2025Article
- Knowledge of women in Poland on the profession and competencies of a midwife.European journal of midwifery · 2024Article
- How Do Midwives View Their Professional Autonomy, Now and in Future?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis article presents research into the professionalization of midwifery in Slovenia. Since recognition by related occupations is important for professions, this comparative study asked doctors and nurses in Slovenia about their perceptions of the status of midwifery.
methodsA questionnaire survey was conducted with 300 Slovenian midwives, 666 nurses and 416 obstetricians. The questionnaire included statements covering traditional sociological notions of the profession (ethics, theory, power), and three notions based on new elements of professionalism (reflective practice, interdisciplinary working, and partnership with clients).
resultsFindings suggest that nurses perceived themselves to be less autonomous than midwives, and this partly explains why most nurses thought that midwifery should be a specialized course of study, after the general nursing diploma. Obstetricians claimed to support midwives, however, they did not give midwives credit for basic midwifery competencies and did not feel midwifery to be equal to their profession. Midwives revealed not to feel autonomous; they felt that nursing and obstetrics is jeopardizing independent midwifery practice.
conclusionsSlovenian midwifery was poorly evaluated in some attributes of professionalism, especially knowledge and autonomy. Even midwives themselves consider midwifery more occupation than profession. The autonomy of midwifery will be hard to achieve in the institutions of medical dominance. The study revealed that participants of all three groups are in a competitive relation and are poorly aware of the roles and competencies of the other two professions. Therefore, partially joined education might be beneficial in order to promote interprofessional collaboration in the future.
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.