ArticlePloS one2022
Directly observed and reported respectful maternity care received during childbirth in public health facilities, Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Factors associated with respectful maternity care reported by patients in selected health facilities in Musanze District, Rwanda: a facility-based cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Measuring respectful maternal and newborn care in Nepal: Comparing linked observation and interview data- prospective cohort study.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Implementing maternal and newborn health quality of care standards in healthcare facilities to improve the adoption of respectful maternity care in Bangladesh, Ghana and Tanzania: a controlled before and after study.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Association of workload and practice of respectful maternity care among the healthcare providers, before and during the early phase of COVID-19 pandemic in South Western Nepal: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Respectful maternity care (RMC) is believed to improve women's childbirth experience and increase health facility delivery. Unfortunately, few women in low- and middle-income countries experience RMC. Patient surveys and independent observations have been used to evaluate RMC, though seldom together. In this study, we assessed RMC received by women using two methodologies and evaluated the associated factors of RMC received. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in nine public health facilities in Ibadan, a large metropolis in Nigeria. We selected 269 pregnant women by cluster sampling. External clinical observers observed them during childbirth using the 29-item Maternal and Child Health Integrated Program RMC observational checklist. The same women were interviewed postpartum using the 15-item RMC scale for self-reported RMC. We analysed total RMC scores and RMC sub-category scores for each tool. All scores were converted to a percentage of the maximum possible to facilitate comparison. Correlation and agreement between the observed and reported RMC scores were determined using Pearson's correlation and Bland-Altman analysis respectively. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors associated with observed RMC. No woman received 100% of the observed RMC items. Self-reported RMC scores were much higher than those observed. The two measures were weakly positively correlated (rho = 0.164, 95%CI: 0.045-0.278, p = 0.007), but had poor agreement. The lowest scoring sub-categories of observed RMC were information and consent (14.0%), then privacy (28.0%). Twenty-eight percent of women (95%CI: 23.0% -33.0%) were observed to be hit during labour and only 8.2% (95%CI: 4.0%-18.0%) received pain relief. Equitable care was the highest sub-category for both observed and reported RMC. Being employed and having completed post-secondary education were significantly associated with higher observed RMC scores. There were also significant facility differences in observed RMC. In conclusion, the women reported higher levels of RMC than were observed indicating that these two methodologies to evaluate RMC give very different results. More consensus and standardisation are required in determining the cut-offs to quantify the proportion of women receiving RMC. The low levels of RMC observed in the study require attention, and it is important to ensure that women are treated equitably, irrespective of personal characteristics or facility context.
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.