ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
What do we know about midwife-woman interactions during vaginal childbirth: a scoping review and thematic analysis.
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
backgroundAgainst the backdrop of changes in the medical model, a clearer awareness among women of their rights, and a deeper emphasis on the "woman-centred" approach, it has become increasingly important to focus on the current state and quality of intrapartum interactions. While midwife-woman interactions during vaginal childbirth are recognized as central to shaping maternal health outcomes and birthing experiences, existing studies offer fragmented insights, with a limited synthesis of how these dynamics influence intrapartum care and support, maternal autonomy in decision-making, and the midwife-woman relationship.
objectivesTo synthesize the existing literature addressing midwife-woman interactions during childbirth and to identify any research gaps.
methodsA scoping review was conducted using Arksey and O'Malley's methodology, with results reported following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A three-stage search strategy was conducted between December 2023 and August 2024, and 11 databases were searched. Eligible articles were charted and thematically analyzed.
resultsA total of 6,560 articles were retrieved, of which 22 were included in the review. Three themes and six subthemes were identified: "Directive or instructive communication", "Multi-facet support needs and provisions (Emotional support: The indispensable but unseen labour; Information support: how much to share; Professional support: Balancing Care and Protocols; Shared Decision-making: Navigating Autonomy and Challenges)", and "Close or distant intrapartum relationship (Trust and respect: The hidden pillars of intrapartum care; The shocking reality of obstetric violence)".
conclusionsThe study of midwife-woman intrapartum interaction needs further in-depth exploration. Notable discrepancies exist in the descriptions of intrapartum interactions between midwives and women, which may result in a mismatch between the care provided by the midwife and the actual needs of the woman. As an innovative and valuable approach, it is recommended that micro-analysis methods, such as CA, be employed in future research to gain a deeper understanding of the nuanced dynamics present in midwife-woman interactions during labour and birth. REGISTRATION: The research protocol was preregistered on the Open Science Framework (Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/R5WYQ ).
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.