ArticleBMC nursing2025
The effectiveness of nurse-led antenatal education on maternal self-efficacy: an evidence-based approach.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual, Augmented, Mixed, and Immersive Technologies for Prenatal and Childbirth Education: Scoping Review.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Review
- Structured psychological nursing and postpartum psychological outcomes in primiparous women: a retrospective temporal cohort study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Risk factors and predictive modeling of postpartum depression among postpartum women: empirical evidence from Chongqing, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Stepping strong: Nurse-led support for mothers in clubfoot care.Bioinformation · 2025Article
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
backgroundImproving maternal self-efficacy during childbirth is a key objective of antenatal care, with evidence suggesting that nurse-led education can play a critical role in this process. However, the overall effectiveness and consistency of these interventions across delivery formats remain unclear.
objectiveTo provide an evidence-based analysis of the effectiveness of nurse-led antenatal education programs on maternal childbirth self-efficacy using quantitative synthesis and subgroup comparisons.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across six databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Embase) to identify relevant studies published from January 2000 to April 2025. Twenty studies (randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs) were included. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the pooled effect size, assess heterogeneity, and evaluate subgroup differences by delivery format (face-to-face, digital, hybrid). Risk of bias was assessed using the ROB 2 tool, and publication bias was evaluated using funnel plot symmetry, Egger's test, and Rosenthal's fail-safe N. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251058392).
resultsThe pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) indicated a significant moderate-to-large effect of nurse-led antenatal education on maternal self-efficacy (SMD = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.69-0.77). Subgroup analysis showed the strongest and most consistent effects for face-to-face programs, while digital interventions demonstrated comparable efficacy with greater variability. Hybrid models yielded moderate but reliable outcomes. Publication bias was not detected, and heterogeneity was moderate (I² < 60%). All included studies reported positive effects.
conclusionThis evidence-based analysis confirms that nurse-led antenatal education substantially improves maternal self-efficacy across various delivery models. These findings support the integration of nurse-led programs into routine prenatal care, with the potential for digital and hybrid formats to enhance scalability and access. Future research should focus on standardizing outcome measures and evaluating long-term impacts.
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.