Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37794351›Full record

ReviewBMC medical ethics2023

Development and validation of the code of ethics for midwives in Iran.

Masoumeh Simbar, Zahra Kiani, Soheila Nazarpour, Farah Babaei

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical ethics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Masoumeh SimbarMidwifery and Reproductive Health Research Center, Department of Midwifery and Reproductive Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. msimbar@gmail.com.
Zahra KianiMidwifery and Reproductive Health Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Soheila NazarpourDepartment of Midwifery, Chalous Branch, Islamic Azad University, Chalous, Iran.
Farah BabaeiDepartment of Midwifery, Deputy of Curative Affairs, Ministry of Health, Education and Treatment, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsidering ethical issues in midwifery care is essential for improving the quality of health services and the client's satisfaction. This study aimed to develop and validate the code of ethics for Midwives in Iran (ICEM). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a mixed sequential study that was performed in three phases including a qualitative study, a review, and the content validity assessment. The first phase was a qualitative study with a content analysis approach. The data were collected by conducting in-depth semi-structured individual interviews with 14 midwifery and ethics experts. The purposive sampling method was used to recruit the participants and sampling continued until data saturation. The data were analyzed using the conventional content analysis described by Graneheim and Lundman. Lincoln and Guba's criteria were used to confirm the trustworthiness of the data. Then, a narrative review of the selected national and international codes of ethics for Midwives was performed to complete the items of the ICEM. For validity assessment, the face and content validity of the items of ICEM was assessed by 15 experts to calculate the content validity ratio (CVR) and index (CVI).

resultsFourteen experts were interviewed in the qualitative phase, and 207 codes were extracted from a content analysis which were categorized into 23 sub-categories and 6 main categories. The extracted codes were considered as the items for ICEM that were completed by a review of the selected national and international code of ethics for Midwives. The content validity and ratio assessment of the items demonstrated an average CVI = 0.92 and CVR = 0.85. Then, the final version of ICEM was developed with 92 items in 6 domains about; 1) "professional Commitments" with 30 items; 2) "providing midwifery services to the client and her companions" with 26 items; 3) "relationship with colleagues" with 11 items; 4) "herself" with 6 items; 5) "education and research" with 8 items; and, 6) "management" with 11 items.

conclusionICEM was prepared with 92 items in six sections that facilitate its use for midwives who are working in the different fields of care, counseling, education, research, and management. In this new version of the ICEM, the items related to recent social-, scientific, and technical improvements were considered for providing ethical midwifery care.

Indexed as

MidwiferyCodes of EthicsCounselingFemaleHumansIranPregnancyQualitative ResearchCode of ethicsEthicsMidwifery

Identifiers

PMID37794351
PMCPMC10548606

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.