ArticleCureus2024
Examining the Cultural Appropriateness and Acceptability of a Traditional Birth Attendants' Training Program in Rural Guatemala.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile there has been notable global advancement in reducing maternal mortality rates (MMRs) in Latin America, the rates among indigenous women remain alarmingly high. This disparity persists in Guatemala, where indigenous women face a two-fold higher MMR compared to their non-indigenous counterparts. Most of the obstetrical care is performed by traditional Mayan birth attendants (TBAs), also known as comadronas, who have minimal formalized clinical training in obstetrical care. Considering there was no national comprehensive training program for TBAs, a unique training program was established in 2014. This program, the School of PowHER (Providing Outreach in Women's Health and Educational Resources), aims to ensure sustainable education led by TBAs for TBAs in rural Guatemala with the ultimate goal of helping TBAs provide basic antenatal care and learn how to identify and refer high-risk pregnancies. The aim of this proposed study is to examine the cultural appropriateness and sensitivity of the training program through a mixed-methods approach.
methodsWe utilized a mixed-methods strategy, combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies. The quantitative aspect involved a 14-item written survey using a three-point Likert scale for responses, while the qualitative part utilized a semi-structured interview guide to conduct a focus group discussion.
resultsThe survey (n=33) showed that 32 comadronas found the curriculum applicable (97%) and comprehensible (97%). However, only 26 comadronas (79%) were comfortable with anatomy terminology. Opinions on teaching tools varied: 13 comadronas (39%) felt they were always representative, 13 comadronas (39%) sometimes, and seven comadronas (21%) never. Group discussions echoed this lack of representation. In the learning environment, 32 comadronas felt welcomed (97%) and 31 felt understood (94%), but five comadronas (15%) were not comfortable asking questions. Thirty-one comadronas (94%) believed training made pregnant women trust comadronas more. Group interviews highlighted increased confidence, better care, and perceived lower maternal mortality.
conclusionThis study found the program to be culturally sensitive and effective. Group interviews highlighted increased confidence, improved patient care, and perceived reductions in maternal mortality. Feedback emphasized the need for more culturally relevant materials, resources, and collaboration with the Ministry of Health. This program's community-centered approach could serve as a model for similar initiatives in low- and middle-income countries addressing high maternal mortality rates, despite language and access challenges.
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.