Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40640772›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025

Birth satisfaction in different social contexts and the challenges of ensuring measurement validity.

Alena Lochmannová, Colin R Martin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

2 authors.

Alena LochmannováDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Travel Medicine, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, alej Svobody 1655/76, Pilsen, 323 00, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7822-0204
Colin R MartinInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, UK. c.martin4@uos.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBirth satisfaction is shaped by social context, yet its assessment faces methodological challenges, particularly in marginalized populations. This study examines birth satisfaction among incarcerated and non-incarcerated women, considering both experiential disparities and potential measurement biases.

methodsA nested retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted with 55 incarcerated women who had given birth prior to incarceration and 79 women from the general population in the Czech Republic. Birth satisfaction was assessed using the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised. All participants completed a standardized pencil-and-paper survey. Responses between incarcerated and non-incarcerated participants were compared, and pencil-and-paper responses of non-incarcerated participants were compared with survey-only administration to validate the survey method.

resultsIncarcerated women reported significantly higher birth satisfaction scores than those in the general population. In the prison population, higher birth satisfaction correlated positively with self-esteem and negatively with PTSD symptoms. Comparison of pen-and-paper and online survey administration in the general population revealed no significant differences, supporting confidence in the equivalence of paper and pencil data capture method in the incarcerated population.

conclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of context in birth satisfaction assessments, as incarcerated women's experiences may be shaped by institutional constraints and psychological dynamics. Ensuring methodological consistency is essential for valid cross-population comparisons and the accurate interpretation of birth satisfaction data.

Indexed as

ParturitionPersonal SatisfactionPrisonersAdultCross-Sectional StudiesCzech RepublicFemaleHumansPregnancyReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSelf ConceptSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultBirth satisfactionIncarcerationPerinatal carePTSDSelf-esteemSurvey methodology

Identifiers

PMID40640772
PMCPMC12243146

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.