ArticleResearch square2025
Development and validation of a person-centered antenatal care scale for low- and middle-income countries.
Article in Research square, 2025. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Person-centered antenatal care (PCANC)-antenatal care that is respectful and responsive to people's needs, values, and preferences-is essential to achieving optimal pregnancy outcomes. Yet, no validated tools exist to comprehensively measure PCANC in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aim to develop and validate a tool to comprehensively measure PCANC relevant to women's experiences in LMICs. Methods: We followed standard procedures for scale development. This included a literature review to adapt items from a prior scale developed in the United States and to generate new items relevant to LMICs; expert reviews with maternal health experts, health care providers, and women with lived experiences (currently pregnant or previously pregnant) to assess content validity; and cognitive interviews and pretesting with pregnant and postpartum women to evaluate clarity, appropriateness, and relevance of the questions. Questions were iteratively revised at each stage and administered in a survey to 300 pregnant (third trimester) and 300 postpartum women (who gave birth within six months of the interview) in the Upper East Region of Ghana. Following data analysis from the first survey, the questions were revised and administered to 2000 postpartum women in Ghana and Kenya (1000 per country). The survey data were used in psychometric analysis to assess construct and criterion validity, and internal consistency reliability. Results: Iterative exploratory factor analysis was used to reduce the number of items from over 60 to 36. The 36 items load onto one dominant factor, with three factors having eigenvalues greater than one. Items are grouped into three conceptual domains representing subscales for "dignity and respect," "communication and autonomy," and "responsive and supportive care." The Cronbach's alpha for the full scale is 0.90, and the subscales are each > 0.7. The summative PCANC scores correlate with global measures of antenatal care quality, satisfaction, and future care location, suggesting good criterion validity. Conclusions: The PCANC scale has high validity and reliability in the sample of prenatal and postpartum women in Ghana and Kenya. This scale will facilitate efforts to measure and improve respectful and responsive antenatal care in LMICs.
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.