ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Differences in women's experiences of labour according to type of fetal monitoring: a quantitative analysis of an Australian national survey.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introWhile monitoring of the fetal heart rate in labour is recommended, few studies have compared women's experiences of different forms of monitoring technologies, their impact on labour and perceived risks and benefits.
methodsThe Women's experiences of Monitoring Baby (WOMB) study, an Australian national survey, examined experiences of intrapartum fetal monitoring in labour. This study is one of two quantitative analyses of survey responses received.
resultsWe received 861 valid responses. The most common form of monitoring across all hospital settings was wired CTG (53% of total). Women who used wired CTG were more likely to be primiparous (OR = 3.220, [95%CI:2.080-4.987], p < 0.001), and give birth at a private hospital (OR = 3.017 [95%CI:1.632-5.576], p < 0.001). Women who were monitored via wired CTG were more likely to use pharmacological pain management, and have an emergency caesarean section (p < 0.001), which remained significant when adjusting for epidural. Women who gave birth vaginally were more likely to have been monitored via intermittent auscultation (OR = 3.582, [95%CI:2.007-6.390], p < 0.001), and to use non-pharmacological techniques such as mobility (p < 0.001) and supportive care (p < 0.01). Of the women monitored via wired CTG 58% felt that monitoring had a negative impact on their labour.
conclusionThis study has substantial implications for research, policy and practice, including the implementation of less invasive and more humanised forms of fetal monitoring. The promotion of freedom of movement and bodily autonomy in labour is essential. This includes implementation of evidence-based practices and information about methods of fetal monitoring that support woman-centred care and optimise physiological processes.
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.