ArticleBMC health services research2025
Development of a midwifery regulatory environment index using data from the Global Midwives' Associations map survey.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Updating the EU Directives on Midwifery: A generational opportunity for the profession and women's rights.European journal of midwifery · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlobal policymakers have proposed strengthening midwifery regulation to improve access to and quality of care provided by midwives, thereby enhancing maternal healthcare delivery and outcomes. However, quantifying 'midwifery regulatory environments' as a construct across countries has been difficult, limiting our ability to evaluate relationships between regulatory environments and key outcomes and hindering actionable steps toward improvement. The Global Midwives' Associations map survey includes data across five domains of regulation (overarching regulatory policy and legislation; education and qualification; licensure; registration/re-licensure; and scope and conduct of practice). We aimed to use these data to develop a composite index that represents the midwifery regulatory environment in the countries that participated in the survey.
methodsTo develop our composite Midwifery Regulatory Environment (MRE) Index, we analyzed data from 115 countries in the Global Midwives' Associations map survey. We identified five different possible scoring characterizations for thirteen regulatory items. Four characterizations used continuous or categorical cumulative scoring and one used multiple individual components scoring. We compared these characterizations using Clarke's test and descriptive model fit metrics to identify the best fit and performance for three outcomes: maternal mortality ratio, low birthweight prevalence, and stillbirth rate.
resultsThe Aggregated Domain Scoring method, which assigns one point for each of the five essential regulatory domains with activity (possible score range: 0-5), was the best fit and performing characterization for maternal mortality ratio and stillbirth outcomes. The Any-or-None Scoring method, which assigns one point per survey item with regulatory activity (possible score range: 0-13), best fit low birthweight prevalence.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates that developing composite characterizations of complex constructs, as exemplified by MRE Index development, can enhance the usability of existing global health datasets. Additionally, it highlights how employing model fit prediction provides a transparent, replicable, and accessible approach for identifying the optimal characterization of the construct based on a specific outcome. Specifically, we found that different characterizations for the MRE Index are preferred for different maternal health outcomes. The MRE Index we have developed stands as a valuable tool for future research exploring relationships between midwifery regulation and maternal health outcomes.
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.