ArticleBMJ open quality2023
Patient-reported outcome and experience measures for quality improvement in pregnancy and childbirth care: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity and reliability of the quality of midwifery childbirth care from women's perspectives scale among Japanese women: a cross-sectional online survey.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Health-related quality of life among pregnant women exposed to malaria in an endemic region of Colombia.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- Understanding and Implementing PROMs and PREMs in Healthcare Quality Frameworks.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2025Article
- Article
- Cultural Adaptation of Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys (PaRIS) Patient and Primary Care Practice Questionnaires to the Slovenian Context.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2025Article
- A Spanish-Language Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Trust in Pregnancy Care Clinician.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- 'Great in theory': Women's care experiences in relation to Australia's national maternity Strategy-Qualitative survey responses.PloS one · 2025Article
- Validity and Reliability of the Newly Developed Patient-Reported Experience Measures Tool for Effectively Assessing the Quality of Care and Patient Safety During Antenatal Services.Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- Article
- Roles of different organizations in implementing patient-reported measures in routine maternity care in Finland.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Article
- Psychometric properties of the maternal breastfeeding evaluation scale: a confirmatory factor analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Observational
- Anxiety, depression, and perceived wellbeing in antenatal women at risk of preterm birth: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) can highlight issues that remain unnoticed when using standard clinical quality indicators. However, estimations of the potential power of measuring PROMs and PREMs to identify unrecognised areas suitable for quality improvement are often limited by a lack of reliable real-world data. Here, we report on how the indicator set for PROMs and PREMs that was recently developed by the International Consortium for Health Outcome Measures can change perspectives on quality assessment in women receiving care for pregnancy and childbirth.
methodsPROMs and PREMs were captured 6 months after childbirth via an online survey in a single academic maternity unit in the Netherlands between 2018 and 2019. Indicators of abnormality were scored using predefined cut-off values established by a national consensus group. We used regression analysis to identify associations between PROMs, PREMs and healthcare use, and further stratified data to explore the distribution of indicators among relevant patient subgroups.
resultsOf 2775 questionnaires, 645 were completed and linked to medical health records. Despite only 5% of women reporting overall dissatisfaction with care, suboptimal scores were often found; in birth experience for 32% of the population, and 42% who experienced painful sexual intercourse. Subgroup analysis further revealed associations with relevant indicators of quality of care; inadequate pain relief among women with preterm birth (OR 8.8), pain with sexual intercourse among women undergoing vaginal assisted delivery (OR 2.2) and women living in a deprived area had problematic birth experiences (coefficient -3.2).
conclusionUse of PROMs and PREMs in pregnancy and childbirth care provides new insights on quality of care, resulting in potentially actionable targets for improvement not normally identified with standard clinical quality indicators. Implementation strategies and follow-up are needed to act on these findings.
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.