ArticleInternational journal of nursing sciences2025
Perceptions and recommendations of multiparas and health-related professionals on appropriate birth intervals: A descriptive qualitative study.
Article in International journal of nursing sciences, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to explore the perceptions and recommendations of multiparas and health-related professionals regarding appropriate birth intervals (BIs) and key determinants. Methods: In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted between April 1 and June 30, 2022. Nine multiparas and thirteen health-related professionals were purposefully sampled until data saturation was reached. A thematic analysis approach was applied to the interview transcripts, utilizing dual independent coding and consensus validation in NVivo 12.0. Results: The data generated two overarching categories: 1) balanced decision-making on the appropriate birth intervals and 2) internal and external determinants integrated with health and societal considerations. Four key themes emerged following the two categories: 1) consistency and discrepancy between the actual and recommended birth intervals of multiparas; 2) health- and development-oriented professional recommendations; 3) internal determinants related to individual-level factors; and 4) external determinants related to child-related factors, family support, and social security. Weighing women's reproductive health and career development, multiparas and health-related professionals perceived a length between 18 and 36 months as the appropriate BI. Conclusion: Multiparas and health-related professionals shaped their balanced recommendations on a relatively appropriate birth interval ranging from 18 to 36 months, which was influenced by women's individual-level factors, child-related factors, family support, and social security. Targeted social and healthcare services should be offered to women and their families during the BIs.
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.