Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37828497›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

The training of midwives to perform obstetric ultrasound scan in Africa for task shifting and extension of scope of practice: a scoping review.

Sanele Lukhele, Fhumulani Mavis Mulaudzi, Nombulelo Sepeng, Khathutshelo Netshisaulu, Roinah Nkhensani Ngunyulu, Maurine Musie, Rafiat Anokwuru

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Emerging applications of artificial intelligence for obstetric ultrasound: A scoping review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sanele LukheleDepartment of Nursing, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa. saniegambu@gmail.com.
Fhumulani Mavis MulaudziDepartment of Nursing, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa.
Nombulelo SepengDepartment of Nursing, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa.
Khathutshelo NetshisauluDepartment of Advanced Nursing Science, University of Venda, Thohoyandou, Republic of South Africa.
Roinah Nkhensani NgunyuluDepartment of Nursing, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa.
Maurine MusieDepartment of Nursing, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa.
Rafiat AnokwuruDepartment of Nursing, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa.
University of Pretoria · ZAUniversity of Johannesburg · ZABabcock University · NGUniversity of Venda · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUltrasound scan is one of the essential assessments that is crucial in the early identification of health risks during antenatal care. Its accessibility to women in low-and middle-income countries remains a serious challenge because ultrasound scans are not within the scope of practice for midwives. However, task shifting and extension of scope of practice aim to train midwives to assess pregnant women through an ultrasound scan. This paper aims to report the findings of a scoping review on the training of midwives to perform obstetric ultrasound scans in Africa.

methodsThe 6-step iterative framework for scoping reviews by Arksey and O'Malley was used to determine the extent of qualitative and quantitative evidence available on the training of midwives on obstetric ultrasound scans, which includes specifying the research question, identifying relevant studies, selecting studies, extracting and charting data, collating, summarising, and synthesising and reporting findings.

resultsA total of 12 articles from eight African countries were included in this scoping review. Three main themes and 13 sub-themes emerged and they are: obstetric ultrasound scan training, challenges experienced by midwives from task shifting and extension of scope of practice regarding obstetric ultrasound scan, and the value of task shifting and extension of scope of practice regarding obstetric ultrasound scan to midwives. DISCUSSION: Despite the available evidence that the training of midwives on obstetric ultrasound scans is essential to ensure the accessibility of quality antenatal health services, the training of midwives on obstetric ultrasound scans in some African countries remains a serious challenge. It is evident from this scoping review results that there is a need for African countries to incorporate obstetric ultrasound scans as part of the scope of practice of midwives. Task shifting necessitates prioritising the training of midwives on the use of obstetric ultrasound scans as one of the steps towards the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal number 3 targets by 2030.

Indexed as

MidwiferyAfricaFemaleHumansPregnancyPrenatal CareScope of PracticeUltrasonography, PrenatalAntenatal careExtension of scope of practiceInterprofessional collaborationMidwifery educationObstetric ultrasound scanScreening and diagnostic testsTask shifting

Identifiers

PMID37828497
PMCPMC10571413
OpenAlexW4387581640

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.