Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38990936›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Pregnant women autonomy when choosing their method of childbirth: Scoping review.

Carlos Henrique Mascarenhas Silva, Cláudia Lourdes Soares Laranjeira, Wallisson Fonseca Pinheiro, Carolina Soares Barros de Melo, Vitor de Oliveira Campos E Silva, Augusto Henrique Fulgêncio Brandão, Francisca Rego, Rui Nunes

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

8 authors.

Carlos Henrique Mascarenhas SilvaFaculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-4867-5878
Cláudia Lourdes Soares LaranjeiraObstetrics and Gynecology Unit - Mater Dei Health Network, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Wallisson Fonseca PinheiroObstetrics and Gynecology Unit - Mater Dei Health Network, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Carolina Soares Barros de MeloObstetrics and Gynecology Unit - Mater Dei Health Network, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Vitor de Oliveira Campos E SilvaSchool of Medical Sciences of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Augusto Henrique Fulgêncio BrandãoObstetrics and Gynecology Unit - Mater Dei Health Network, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Francisca RegoFaculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Rui NunesFaculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper has as its theme the autonomy of pregnant women in relation to choosing the method of birth for their child. The objective was to carry out a scoping review to study the literature and evidence of how autonomy is being offered to parturient women. Study design and location: In October 2023, a search was carried out using the terms "pregnant women" AND "delivery" AND "autonomy" in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Scielo and LILACS. The search included articles from 2016 to 2023. Of the 179 articles found, 15 met the criteria and were selected for this review. Results: the pregnant woman's autonomy in choosing the method of childbirth is influenced by several factors, such as the obstetrician's recommendation, the medical team, and negative and positive experiences. Thus, when this autonomy is shared with the obstetrician, the obstetrician recommends cesarean section as the safest route, but does not explain the benefits and harms of both routes (vaginal and cesarean section), causing the woman to accept the cesarean section. Midwives recommend vaginal birth because they believe it to be natural and safe and explain the benefits and harms of both methods, respecting the pregnant woman's choice of the method she prefers. Conclusion: women have the fundamental right to choose their method of birth and must be properly guided throughout prenatal care, whether by an obstetrician or a midwife, about the options, risks and benefits of each method of childbirth, respecting the ethical principle of beneficence.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionDelivery, ObstetricParturitionPersonal AutonomyPregnant PeopleChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID38990936
PMCPMC11238978

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.