ReviewAJOG global reports2025
What are the influences on women's preferences and decision-making when planning mode of birth in high-income countries? A qualitative systematic review.
Review in AJOG global reports, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In antenatal care in the UK NHS, the concept of choice of mode of birth (MOB) has been recommended for some years but is still poorly operationalised. Proactive, routine provision of balanced and relevant information to women in antenatal care can be supported by using decision aids but such an aid does not currently exist. The objective of this qualitative systematic review was to identify the factors shaping women's MOB preference and the barriers and facilitators to supported MOB decision-making. Data sources: Seven major electronic databases were searched for articles published in English between 2011 and November 2022. Study eligibility criteria Eligible studies were of any design and provided qualitative data from currently or previously pregnant women in high-income countries, about reasons for MOB preference, and/or barriers or facilitators to women making supported MOB choices. Data were extracted into a pre-designed data extraction form. Identified subthemes were grouped and mapped onto two preestablished global themes. Study quality was assessed using the CASP tool for qualitative research. Confidence in the findings was assessed using GRADECERQual. Results: Women's preferences for MOB were shaped by perceptions of advantages or disadvantages of each MOB and their own or other women's previous birth experiences. Barriers to informed MOB decision-making were mainly relating to healthcare professionals' (HCPs') negative attitudes, which limited women's perceived options, and women's own strong personal beliefs and opinions. Facilitators included having time, support and information on which to make a robust decision. Conclusions: Barriers to supported decision-making about MOB still exist. HCPs are well placed to guide women through the decision-making process. Informed implementation of decision aids has the potential to address barriers in supported decision-making about MOB in routine NHS antenatal care.
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.