ArticleBMJ open2022
Companionship for women/birthing people using antenatal and intrapartum care in England during COVID-19: a mixed-methods analysis of national and organisational responses and perspectives.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facilitators and barriers to implementation of obstetric ultrasound scanning intervention by midwives within maternal and child health departments of the selected healthcare facilities in four districts of Zambia: experiences of healthcare workers.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Protecting emotional wellbeing during childbirth: exploring the role of organisational regulatory processes in promoting compassion.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
- Preliminary findings on the experiences of care for women who suffered early pregnancy losses during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- The influence of antenatal imaging on prenatal bonding in uncomplicated pregnancies: a mixed methods analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Freedom for some, but not for Mum: the reproductive injustice associated with pandemic 'Freedom Day' for perinatal women in the United Kingdom.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Healthcare providers' experiences of maternity care service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: a follow-up systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Review
- 'An extra level of kind of torment': Views and experiences of recurrent miscarriage care during the initial phases of COVID-19 in Ireland-A qualitative interview study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Assessing safe and personalised maternity and neonatal care through a pandemic: a case study of outcomes and experiences in two trusts in England using the ASPIRE COVID-19 framework.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- "It has been the most difficult time in my career": A qualitative exploration of UK obstetric sonographers' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.Radiography (London, England : 1995) · 2023Article
- Article
- Associations between breastfeeding intention, breastfeeding practices and post-natal depression during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-country cross-sectional study.Maternal & child nutrition · 2023Article
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical guidance and risk assessments, and the importance of effective leadership to support UK obstetric sonographers.Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences · 2022Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom in 2020-21: Findings of three national surveys.Midwifery · 2022Article
- Two are better than one? The impact of lay birth companions on childbirth experiences and PTSD.Archives of women's mental health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore stakeholders' and national organisational perspectives on companionship for women/birthing people using antenatal and intrapartum care in England during COVID-19, as part of the Achieving Safe and Personalised maternity care In Response to Epidemics (ASPIRE) COVID-19 UK study.
settingMaternity care provision in England.
participantsInterviews were held with 26 national governmental, professional and service-user organisation leads (July-December 2020). Other data included public-facing outputs logged from 25 maternity Trusts (September/October 2020) and data extracted from 78 documents from eight key governmental, professional and service-user organisations that informed national maternity care guidance and policy (February-December 2020).
resultsSix themes emerged: 'Postcode lottery of care' highlights variations in companionship and visiting practices between trusts/locations, 'Confusion and stress around 'rules'' relates to a lack of and variable information concerning companionship/visiting, 'Unintended consequences' concerns the negative impacts of restricted companionship or visiting on women/birthing people and staff, 'Need for flexibility' highlights concerns about applying companionship and visiting policies irrespective of need, ''Acceptable' time for support' highlights variations in when and if companionship was 'allowed' antenatally and intrapartum and 'Loss of human rights for gain in infection control' emphasises how a predominant focus on infection control was at a cost to psychological safety and human rights.
conclusionsPolicies concerning companionship and visiting have been inconsistently applied within English maternity services during the COVID-19 pandemic. In some cases, policies were not justified by the level of risk, and were applied indiscriminately regardless of need. There is an urgent need to determine how to sensitively and flexibly balance risks and benefits and optimise outcomes during the current and future crisis situations.
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.