Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38318267›Full record

ReviewAJOG global reports2024

Maternal satisfaction with group care: a systematic review.

Fitim Sadiku, Hana Bucinca, Florence Talrich, Vlorian Molliqaj, Erza Selmani, Christine McCourt, Marlies Rijnders, George Little, David C Goodman, Sharon Schindler Rising and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AJOG global reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Integrating postnatal care into the redesign of group care beyond birth.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

11 authors.

Fitim SadikuAction for Mother and Children, Prishtina, Kosovo (Mr Sadiku, Dr Bucinca, Mr Molliqaj, and Dr Hoxha).
Hana BucincaAction for Mother and Children, Prishtina, Kosovo (Mr Sadiku, Dr Bucinca, Mr Molliqaj, and Dr Hoxha).
Florence TalrichVrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium (Ms Talrich).
Vlorian MolliqajAction for Mother and Children, Prishtina, Kosovo (Mr Sadiku, Dr Bucinca, Mr Molliqaj, and Dr Hoxha).
Erza SelmaniEvidence Synthesis Group, Prishtina, Kosovo (Mr Sadiku, Ms Selmani, and Dr Hoxha).
Christine McCourtCity, University of London, London, United Kingdom (Dr McCourt).
Marlies RijndersThe Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands (Dr Rijnders).
George LittleGeisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH (Dr Little).
David C GoodmanThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH (Drs Goodman and Hoxha).
Sharon Schindler RisingGroup Care Global, Philadelphia, PA (Dr Rijnders and Ms Rising).
Ilir HoxhaAction for Mother and Children, Prishtina, Kosovo (Mr Sadiku, Dr Bucinca, Mr Molliqaj, and Dr Hoxha).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis review examined the quantitative relationship between group care and overall maternal satisfaction compared with standard individual care. DATA SOURCES: We searched CINAHL, Clinical Trials, The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from the beginning of 2003 through June 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included studies that reported the association between overall maternal satisfaction and centering-based perinatal care where the control group was standard individual care. We included randomized and observational designs.

methodsScreening and independent data extraction were carried out by 4 researchers. We extracted data on study characteristics, population, design, intervention characteristics, satisfaction measurement, and outcome. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane tools for Clinical Trials (RoB2) and observational studies (ROBINS-I). We summarized the study, intervention, and satisfaction measurement characteristics. We presented the effect estimates of each study descriptively using a forest plot without performing an overall meta-analysis. Meta-analysis could not be performed because of variations in study designs and methods used to measure satisfaction. We presented studies reporting mean values and odds ratios in 2 separate plots. The presentation of studies in forest plots was organized by type of study design.

resultsA total of 7685 women participated in the studies included in the review. We found that most studies (ie, 17/20) report higher satisfaction with group care than standard individual care. Some of the noted results are lower satisfaction with group care in both studies in Sweden and 1 of the 2 studies from Canada. Higher satisfaction was present in 14 of 15 studies reporting CenteringPregnancy, Group Antenatal Care (1 study), and Adapted CenteringPregnancy (1 study). Although indicative of higher maternal satisfaction, the results are often based on statistically insignificant effect estimates with wide confidence intervals derived from small sample sizes.

conclusionThe evidence confirms higher maternal satisfaction with group care than with standard care. This likely reflects group care methodology, which combines clinical assessment, facilitated health promotion discussion, and community-building opportunities. This evidence will be helpful for the implementation of group care globally.

Indexed as

antenatal careCenteringPregnancyConnecting PregnancyExpect With MeG-ANCGroup Based Antenatal Caregroup careperinatal carepostnatal carePregnancy Circlesprenatal carequality of caresatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID38318267
PMCPMC10839533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.