ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Birthing positions and mother`s satisfaction with childbirth: a cross-sectional study on the relevance of self determination.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing maternal autonomy in choosing birthing positions: an exploratory pre-post intervention study protocol (MAM-Care).BMJ open · 2026Article
- Free positions in the second stage of labor for pelvic floor protection: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of nulliparous women's different childbirth positions during the second stage of labor: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.International journal of nursing sciences · 2025Review
- What do we actually know about the biomechanics of pregnancy and labour? A systematic scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- The Effects of Evidence-based Management of Labor and Normal Delivery on the Satisfaction and Childbirth Experience among Primiparous Women: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionConsidering the inconclusive evidence regarding the clinical benefits of specific birthing positions, emphasis has been placed on adhering to women's preferences during the second stage of labour. Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the association between birthing position, the freedom to choose a birth position during the second stage of labour, and women's subjective satisfaction with childbirth.
methodsWe performed a cross-sectional survey of women 8 or 12 months after a vaginal birth in a hospital. The women were recruited via two cooperating health insurance companies. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the strength of the association between birthing position and maternal satisfaction with childbirth, with a particular focus on interactions with self-determination.
resultsIn total, the data from 761 women were analysed. The supine position was the most frequently reported birthing position in the second stage of labour at 77.5%. Notably, 39.0% and 30.5% of the women who gave birth in the dorsal and lateral supine positions, respectively, stated that the birth position was not chosen voluntarily. The regression models show a significant negative association between supine birthing position and satisfaction with childbirth, which is significantly related to self-determination. The most common reason for the adoption of a specific birthing position was instructions from medical staff. DISCUSSION: The data provide insight into the perceived satisfaction with childbirth depending on the birthing position, whereby the relevance of self-determination is particularly evident. At the same time, self-determination is often not given, which is associated with reduced birth satisfaction.
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.