Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40352646›Full record

ReviewSN social sciences2025

When midwife continuity of carer is the policy proposal, what is the problem of perinatal health inequalities represented to be?

Ditte Madsen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in SN social sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Ditte MadsenUniversity of Exeter (Politics), Exeter (Devon), UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5084-4944

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Midwife continuity of carer (MCOC) is widely recommended to protect birthing people against disrespectful care and mitigate effects of social adversity. In the UK, this is reflected in the Core20PLUS5 framework, which identifies maternity and, specifically, MCOC as one of five national priorities for reducing healthcare inequalities. Within health policy networks, the prevailing view of the policy process is that the task of government is to find solutions to existing policy problems. A critical policy approach, in contrast, considers how any policy proposal represents a problem in a particular way, shaping what is perceived as possible or desirable. Adopting this approach, I suggest that the promise of MCOC (and, specifically, intrapartum continuity) has been overstated, given the context of extreme social inequality, chronic underfunding of the NHS, the impact of austerity and the denial of structural racism in the UK. MCOC has been found to improve access, experience, and outcomes for disadvantaged and racially minoritized people by offering more personalized care. When MCOC is the policy proposal, however, the problem of inequalities in perinatal health tends to be represented in terms of fragmented maternity care, limiting policy discussion of the drivers of health inequality. This enables elected officials to appear to address health inequality by relying on midwives to adopt more flexible working practices. Representing the problem as a matter of health justice, in contrast, not only requires that personalized care is informed by structural competency and cultural safety but demands that policymakers address structural drivers beyond the healthcare system.

Indexed as

Better BirthsCarol Lee BacchiCore20PLUS5Health injusticeIntrapartum continuitySocial Determinants of Health

Identifiers

PMID40352646
PMCPMC12064444

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.