Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38925917›Full record

ArticleMedical humanities2024

Fluid modernities: the birthing pool in late twentieth-century Britain.

Victoria Bates, Jennifer Crane, Maria Fannin

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Medical humanities, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Victoria BatesHistory, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK victoria.bates@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3106-7764
Jennifer CraneGeographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3926-3599
Maria FanninGeographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8922-2499

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S033793/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Birthing pools are a common feature of maternity units across Europe and North America, and in home birth practice. Despite their prevalence and popularity, these blue or white, often bulky plastic objects have received minimal empirical or theoretical analysis. This article attends to the emergence, design and meaning of such birthing pools, with a focus on the UK in the 1980s and 1990s. Across spheres of media, political and everyday debate, the pools characterise the paradoxes of 'modern maternity': they are 'fluidly' timeless and new, natural and medical, homely and unusual, safe and risky. Beyond exploring the contradictions of 'modern maternity', we also make two key interventions. First, we contend that modern maternity has substantially expanded in recent decades to hold and include additional ideas about comfort and experience. Second, we flag the culturally specific notions of 'modernity' at play in modern births: the popularity of the birthing pool was typically among white, middle-class women. We argue that birthing pools have had an impact at a critical moment in birthing people's care, and we map out the uneven and unjust terrains through which they have assumed cultural and medical prominence.

Indexed as

Home ChildbirthBirthing CentersCultureDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHistory, 20th CenturyHumansParturitionPregnancyUnited KingdomHistorymidwiferyobstetricspregnancyreproductive medicine

Identifiers

PMID38925917
PMCPMC11347258

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.