SynthesisBMJ open2024
Midwives' experience of telehealth and remote care: a systematic mixed methods review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping global inequities in telemedicine implementation: An umbrella review of barriers and facilitators.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- The Future of Healthcare-Simulation-Based Learning Curricula and Preparing Future Midwives for Effective Rapport-Building in Telehealth Settings.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on working conditions of maternity staff - a scoping review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIncreasing the midwifery workforce has been identified as an evidence-based approach to decrease maternal mortality and reproductive health disparities worldwide. Concurrently, the profession of midwifery, as with all healthcare professions, has undergone a significant shift in practice with acceleration of telehealth use to expand access. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify and synthesize the existing evidence regarding how midwives experience, perceive and accept providing sexual and reproductive healthcare services at a distance with telehealth.
methodsFive databases were searched, PubMed, CINHAL, PsychInfo, Embase and the Web of Science, using search terms related to 'midwives', 'telehealth' and 'experience'. Peer-reviewed studies with quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods designs published in English were retrieved and screened. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were subjected to full-text data extraction and appraisal of quality. Using a convergent approach, the findings were synthesized into major themes and subthemes.
resultsAfter applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 10 articles on midwives' experience of telehealth were reviewed. The major themes that emerged were summarized as integrating telehealth into clinical practice; balancing increased connectivity; challenges with building relationships via telehealth; centring some patients while distancing others; and experiences of telehealth by age and professional experience.
conclusionsMost current studies suggest that midwives' experience of telehealth is deeply intertwined with midwives' experience of the response to COVID-19 pandemic in general. More research is needed to understand how sustained use of telehealth or newer hybrid models of telehealth and in-person care are perceived by midwives.
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.