ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2022
Ten years of a publicly funded homebirth service in Victoria: Maternal and neonatal outcomes.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breastfeeding among contemporary Australian populations and 2025 national targets: a scoping review of current data and implications for policy and practice.International breastfeeding journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRates of homebirth in Australia remain low, at less than 0.3% of all births.
aimsTo report maternal and neonatal outcomes of ten years of a publicly funded homebirth service, 2009-2019.
methodRetrospective analysis of clinical outcome data including neonatal outcomes of women who requested a homebirth at a large metropolitan health service in Victoria, Australia. The primary outcomes included: maternal outcomes (mortality, transfer to hospital, place and mode of birth, perineal status, type of third stage of labour, postpartum haemorrhage), and neonatal outcomes (mortality, Apgar score at five minutes, birthweight, breastfeeding initiation, significant morbidity, transfer to hospital).
resultsReferrals for 827 women were reviewed; 633 remained eligible at 36 weeks gestation, and 473 (57%) birthed at home. Compared to women who did not, women who had a homebirth were significantly more likely to be multiparous, have a normal vaginal birth and an intact perineum, less likely to require suturing and less likely to have blood loss of more than 500 mL. Compared to infants not born at home, infants born at home were significantly less likely to require resuscitation, more likely to be of normal birthweight and exclusively receive breastmilk on discharge. There were no maternal deaths and one neonatal death of a baby born at home before the arrival of a midwife.
conclusionsThe outcomes for women accepted into the publicly funded homebirth program suggest appropriate triaging and case selection. A publicly funded homebirth program, with appropriate governance and clinical guidelines, appears to be a safe option for women experiencing low-risk pregnancies.
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.