Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34838039›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2021

The State of the World's Midwifery 2021 report: findings to drive global policy and practice.

Andrea Nove, Petra Ten Hoope-Bender, Martin Boyce, Sarah Bar-Zeev, Luc de Bernis, Geeta Lal, Zoë Matthews, Million Mekuria, Caroline S E Homer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Factors influencing turnover intention among midwives: a systematic review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Workplace Accommodations for Nurses Who Experience Disabilities: A Scoping Review.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2026
    Article
  4. Engagement in women's health: a history.Research involvement and engagement · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Andrea NoveNovametrics Ltd, Duffield, DE56 4HQ, UK. andrea@novametrics.org.ORCID 0000-0001-5272-3014
Petra Ten Hoope-BenderUNFPA, 7 rue de Varembé, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland.
Martin BoyceNovametrics Ltd, Duffield, DE56 4HQ, UK.
Sarah Bar-ZeevUNFPA, 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY, 10158, USA.
Luc de BernisNovametrics Ltd, Duffield, DE56 4HQ, UK.
Geeta LalUNFPA, 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY, 10158, USA.
Zoë MatthewsUniversity of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Million MekuriaUNFPA, 7 rue de Varembé, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland.
Caroline S E HomerBurnet Institute, 85 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.

Funding

New Venture Fund NVF-NGDF-NOV10-Subgrant-014350-2021-05-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The third global State of the World's Midwifery report (SoWMy 2021) provides an updated evidence base on the sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health (SRMNAH) workforce. For the first time, SoWMy includes high-income countries (HICs) as well as low- and middle-income countries. This paper describes the similarities and differences between regions and income groups, and discusses the policy implications of these variations. SoWMy 2021 estimates a global shortage of 900,000 midwives, which is particularly acute in low-income countries (LICs) and in Africa. The shortage is projected to improve only slightly by 2030 unless additional investments are made. The evidence suggests that these investments would yield important returns, including: more positive birth experiences, improved health outcomes, and inclusive and equitable economic growth. Most HICs have sufficient SRMNAH workers to meet the need for essential interventions, and their education and regulatory environments tend to be strong. Upper-middle-income countries also tend to have strong policy environments. LICs and lower-middle-income countries tend to have a broader scope of practice for midwives, and many also have midwives in leadership positions within national government. Key regional variations include: major midwife shortages in Africa and South-East Asia but more promising signs of growth in South-East Asia than in Africa; a strong focus in Africa on professional midwives (rather than associate professionals: the norm in many South-East Asian countries); heavy reliance on medical doctors rather than midwives in the Americas and Eastern Mediterranean regions and parts of the Western Pacific; and a strong educational and regulatory environment in Europe but a lack of midwife leaders at national level. SoWMy 2021 provides stakeholders with the latest data and information to inform their efforts to build back better and fairer after COVID-19. This paper provides a number of policy responses to SoWMy 2021 that are tailored to different contexts, and suggests a variety of issues to consider in these contexts. These suggestions are supported by the inclusion of all countries in the report, because it is clear which countries have strong SRMNAH workforces and enabling environments and can be viewed as exemplars within regions and income groups.

Indexed as

COVID-19MidwiferyAdolescentFemaleHealth WorkforceHumansInfant, NewbornPolicyPregnancySARS-CoV-2Health workforceHuman resources for healthMidwiferyMidwivesSexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health

Identifiers

PMID34838039
PMCPMC8627087

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.