ArticleJournal of health services research & policy2023
A qualitative study of the dynamics of access to remote antenatal care through the lens of candidacy.
Article in Journal of health services research & policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Understanding care-seeking of pregnant women from underserved groups: a systematic review and meta-ethnography.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Primary care determinants for timely diagnosis of dementia.Family medicine and community health · 2026Article
- Time to explain and not just describe disparities.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Virtual Maternity Care During Pregnancy: A Metasynthesis of the Qualitative Literature on Women's Experiences.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- Patient-centred postpartum care provision: virtual delivery, tiered escalation, and tensions between efficiency, preference, and clinical concern.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Experiences of seeking and receiving maternity care during a health-system shock: a qualitative study with women and partners in the UK with a focus on marginalised groups.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Article
- What's been tried: a curated catalogue of efforts to improve access to general practice.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Optimising digital clinical consultations in maternity care: a realist review and implementation principles.BMJ open · 2024Review
- University students' access to mental health services: A qualitative study of the experiences of health service professionals through the lens of candidacy in England.Journal of health services research & policy · 2024Article
- Preliminary findings on the experiences of care for women who suffered early pregnancy losses during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Accessing care for Long Covid from the perspectives of patients and healthcare practitioners: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Using self-monitoring to detect and manage raised blood pressure and pre-eclampsia during pregnancy: the BUMP research programme and its impact.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024Review
- Developing initial programme theories for a realist synthesis on digital clinical consultations in maternity care: contributions from stakeholder involvement.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2024Article
- Article
- Healthcare providers' experiences of maternity care service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom: a follow-up systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of pregnant women, antenatal healthcare professionals, and system leaders to understand the impact of the implementation of remote provision of antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 93 participants, including 45 individuals who had been pregnant during the study period, 34 health care professionals, and 14 managers and system-level stakeholders. Analysis was based on the constant comparative method and used the theoretical framework of candidacy.
resultsWe found that remote antenatal care had far-reaching effects on access when understood through the lens of candidacy. It altered women's own identification of themselves and their babies as eligible for antenatal care. Navigating services became more challenging, often requiring considerable digital literacy and sociocultural capital. Services became less permeable, meaning that they were more difficult to use and demanding of the personal and social resources of users. Remote consultations were seen as more transactional in character and were limited by lack of face-to-face contact and safe spaces, making it more difficult for women to make their needs - both clinical and social - known, and for professionals to assess them. Operational and institutional challenges, including problems in sharing of antenatal records, were consequential. There were suggestions that a shift to remote provision of antenatal care might increase risks of inequities in access to care in relation to every feature of candidacy we characterised.
conclusionIt is important to recognise the implications for access to antenatal care of a shift to remote delivery. It is not a simple swap: it restructures many aspects of candidacy for care in ways that pose risks of amplifying existing intersectional inequalities that lead to poorer outcomes. Addressing these challenges through policy and practice action is needed to tackle these risks.
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.