ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2022
Exploring midwives' experiences of implementing the Labour Hopscotch Framework: A midwifery innovation.
Article in European journal of midwifery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of labour hopscotch framework on maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women: A randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Women's empowerment for active labor: A qualitative study with nurse-midwives in antenatal education for childbirth.European journal of midwifery · 2024Article
- 'Labour Hopscotch': Women's evaluation of using the steps during labor.European journal of midwifery · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMidwives are ideally placed to promote physiological birth and improve women's birth experiences. Freedom of movement in labor is highly recommended as it reduces a need for obstetric interventions in labor and prevents and corrects labor complications, such as poor progress and malposition of the fetus. The Labour Hopscotch Framework (LHF) provides women and midwives with a visual depiction of the steps they can undertake to remain active and, in this way, support physiological birth processes. The objective of this study was to explore midwives' experiences of supporting women during labor with the Labour Hopscotch Framework and identify any improvements necessary to the Labour Hopscotch Framework.
methodsA two phased mixed-method sequential explanatory design study consisting of a survey (women, n=809 and partners, n=759) and focus group (n=8 midwives) was completed to evaluate the LHF following its implementation. This article presents the findings reporting midwives' perceptions of using the Labour Hopscotch Framework with women and their birthing partners. The setting was a large urban teaching maternity hospital in Dublin, Ireland, where eight midwives practiced in the following areas: labor suite, antenatal unit, and community midwifery.
resultsThe Labour Hopscotch Framework was described as beneficial in promoting physiological birth, using a creative, attractive visual depiction to guide women in, and before, labor. The Labour Hopscotch Framework was deemed helpful in increasing midwifery students and newly qualified midwives' confidence to provide women with tangible, supportive assistance during labor and increased partners' involvement in the labor process.
conclusionsLabour Hopscotch Framework should be more widely promoted to all women attending the hospital for maternity care and a clear explanation of each step given and demonstrated to increase women's understanding of the steps within. Labour Hopscotch training should be included in midwifery education programs.
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.