Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38750419›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

Sacred space: a qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis of women's experiences of supportive birthing environments.

December Maxwell, Sarah R Leat, Toni Gallegos, Regina T Praetorius

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

December MaxwellThe University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA.
Sarah R LeatThe University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA.
Toni GallegosThe University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA.
Regina T PraetoriusThe University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA. rtpraetorius@uta.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the United States there are roughly three million births a year, ranging from cesarean to natural births. A major aspect of the birthing process is related to the healing environment, and how that helps or harms healing for the mother and child. Using the theoretical framework, Theory of Supportive Care Settings (TSCS), this study aimed to explore what is necessary to have a safe and sacred healing environment for mothers.

methodThis study utilized an updated Qualitative Interpretive Meta-synthesis (QIMS) design called QIMS-DTT [deductive theory testing] to answer the research question, What are mother's experiences of environmental factors contributing to a supportive birthing environment within healthcare settings?

resultsKey terms were run through multiple databases, which resulted in 5,688 articles. After title and abstract screening, 43 were left for full-text, 12 were excluded, leaving 31 to be included in the final QIMS. Five main themes emerged from analysis: 1) Service in the environment, 2) Recognizing oneself within the birthing space, 3) Creating connections with support systems, 4) Being welcomed into the birthing space, and 5) Feeling safe within the birthing environment.

conclusionsProviding a warm and welcoming birth space is crucial for people who give birth to have positive experiences. Providing spaces where the person can feel safe and supported allows them to find empowerment in the situation where they have limited control.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchAdultBirth SettingDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansMothersParturitionPregnancySocial SupportBecoming a motherBirthing processBuilt environmentQualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis (QIMS)

Identifiers

PMID38750419
PMCPMC11097458

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.