ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Midwife-led birthing centre in the humanitarian setup: An experience from the Rohingya camp, Bangladesh.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Building Capacity in Crisis: Evaluating a Health Assistant Training Program for Young Rohingya Refugee Women.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Bangladesh, Midwife Led Birthing Centres (MLBCs) have been established to provide midwifery care and sexual and reproductive health services for the displaced Rohingya population in Cox's Bazar. The aim of this study was to explore MLBCs in this humanitarian context from the perspectives of women, midwives, and other key stakeholders. A mixed-method case study was conducted at one of the MLBCs within the Rohingya refugee camps in Cox's Bazar. The MLBC serves a population of approximately 8,500 people. Quantitative data were collected from the medical records and documents of the MLBC. Qualitative data included two key informant interviews (KIIs) with policy makers, one focus group discussion (FGD) with 7 midwives and ten in-depth interviews (IDIs) with Rohingya women who gave birth in this MLBC. Thematic analysis of qualitative data was performed. In 2022, 267 women gave birth at the MLBC, and 70 women with complications were transferred to higher-level facilities. Women chose the MLBC because of the respectful care provided by kind and skillful midwives, and the high-quality services. The MLBC was often recommended by community volunteers and relatives. Midwives provided a range of health services including antenatal, labour and birth, postnatal, family planning, mental health support and gender-based violence services. Challenges included language barriers, difficulty obtaining transport from home and back particularly at night in remote areas, security fears and weak cell phone coverage that affected communication for referral and follow-up. Recommendations included increased support and security staff, establishing a referral hospital nearer to the camp, refresher training for midwives and monitoring, and mentoring to improve service quality. The MLBC in the Rohingya camp shows that respectful midwifery care including management and referral of obstetric complications with wider sexual and reproductive health services can be provided in a humanitarian setting to optimize maternal and neonatal health outcomes.
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.