ArticleJournal of midwifery & women's health2022
Assessing Perception of Prenatal Care Quality Among Black Women in the United States.
Article in Journal of midwifery & women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Racial microaggressions in prenatal care settings and perceived quality of prenatal care among Black/African American women.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Association of Prepregnancy Cardiovascular Risk Factors Clusters With Stillbirth Risk Across Racial and Ethnic Groups: A Nationwide Population-Based Study of 31.4 Million Singleton Births and 131 047 Stillbirths.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Adaptation of the "Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire" (QPCQ) Into Turkish: A Validity and Reliability Study.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Prenatal and Postpartum Care Experiences Among Black Birthing People in the United States: An Integrative Review.Journal of midwifery & women's healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere has been little attention to measuring quality of prenatal care from a Black person's perspective. We examined validity and reliability of the Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ) and perceptions of the quality of prenatal care among pregnant Black women.
methodsA total of 190 women had complete data on the postpartum questionnaire containing the QPCQ within 8 weeks after birth. Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α. Construct validity was assessed through hypothesis testing using select questions from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) and Pearson's r correlation.
resultsThe mean (SD) maternal age was 26.5 (5.5) years, and 85.3% of births were term (>37 weeks' 0 days' gestation). The total mean (SD) QPCQ score was 191.3 (27.9) points (range 46-230), and the mean (SD) item score for the subscales ranged from 3.88 (0.80) points to 4.27 (0.64). The Cronbach's α for the overall QPCQ score was .97 and ranged from .72 to .96 for the 6 subscale scores, which indicated acceptable internal consistency reliability. All but one subscale had a Cronbach's α higher than .80. The Approachability subscale had a Cronbach's α of .72. Construct validity demonstrated a moderate and significant positive correlation between the PRAMS items and the QPCQ (r = .273, P < .001). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the validity and reliability of the QPCQ and perceptions of quality of prenatal care among Black women from the United States. The results indicate that participants rate the quality of their prenatal care highly and that the QPCQ is a reliable and valid measure of the quality of prenatal care. Use of a convenient and reliable instrument to measure the quality of prenatal care rather than prenatal care satisfaction or utilization may help to elucidate the factors of prenatal care that are protective specifically among Black women.
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.