ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023
Development and early validation of questionnaires to assess system level factors affecting male partners' attendance at childbirth in LMICs.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is evidence that a woman who receives continuous labour support from a chosen companion can have shorter labour duration, is more likely to give birth without medical interventions, and report a satisfying childbirth experience. These outcomes result from the beneficial effects of emotional and practical support from the woman's chosen companion, and care provided by health providers. When a woman's chosen companion is her male partner, in addition to the above benefits, his presence can promote his bonding with the baby, and shared parenthood. However, there may be healthcare system barriers, including organisational, management and individual (staff) factors, that inhibit or restrict women's choice of companion. There are currently no suitable survey tools that can be used to assess the system level factors affecting the implementation of male partners' attendance at childbirth in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs).
methodsWe designed two questionnaires to help to address that gap: the Male Partners' Attendance at Childbirth-Questionnaire for Heads of Maternity Units (MPAC-QHMUs); and the Male Partners' Attendance at Childbirth-Questionnaire for Maternity Staff (MPAC-QMS). We carried out an extensive review to generate initial items of the two questionnaires. We assessed the content and face validity of the two questionnaires in a three-round modified Delphi study.
resultsThe Male Partners' Attendance at Childbirth-Questionnaire for Heads of Maternity Units (MPAC-QHMUs) focused on organisational and management factors. The Male Partners' Attendance at Childbirth-Questionnaire of Maternity Staff (MPAC-QMS) focused on individual staff factors. The final MPAC-QHMUs and MPAC-QMS included items which garnered over 80% content relevance according to the experts' rating. After all three consensus rounds of the Delphi study, 43 items were retained for the MPAC-QHMUs and 61 items were retained for the MPAC-QMS.
conclusionsThe MPAC-QHMUs and the MPAC-QMS may help understanding of barriers affecting male partners' attendance at childbirth in LMICs in order to devise implementation strategies to enable wider availability and to maximize women's choices during labour and childbirth. The MPAC-QHMUs and the MPAC-QMS as newly-developed questionnaires require further validation of their acceptability and feasibility in different cultural contexts, and languages.
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.