ArticleBMC public health2025
Status and influencing factors of obstetric violence: a mixed study.
Article in BMC public health, 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.
- Status and influencing factors of obstetric violence in Shanghai, China: a multicenter cross-sectional survey.BMC public health · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundFew researches have focused on obstetric violence in the Asia-Pacific region, necessitating an understanding of the current situation of obstetric violence and exploration of factors influencing its occurrence. This study aimed to investigate the current status and influencing factors of obstetric violence.
methodsWe used a modified obstetric violence questionnaire to understand the status of obstetric violence in women and the objective sampling method to select qualified interviewees for face-to-face semi-structured in-depth interviews.
resultsSeven hundred twenty-one women completed the online questionnaire, among whom 10 women participated in the in-depth interview. The current prevalence of obstetric violence was 51.6% (n = 372), with verbal violence being the most common type (82.0%, n = 305). In binary logistic regression analysis, living in countryside [OR (95% CI) = 0.592 (0.402-0.872)], private hospitals [OR (95% CI) = 0.422 (0.233-0.765)], multiparas [OR (95% CI) = 0.405 (0.273-0.601)], and having a family member accompaniment during delivery in the labor room [OR (95% CI) = 0.324 (0.177-0.59], having prenatal maternal education [OR (95% CI) = 0.583 (0.393-0.865)], and active expression of needs during childbirth [OR (95% CI) = 0.415 (0.252-0.685)] were protective factors for obstetric violence. Maternal or family members having workplace violence against medical staff during childbirth [OR (95% CI) = 5.642 (2.148-14.818)], and familiarity with obstetric violence [OR (95% CI) = 2.138 (1.360-3.360)] were risk factors for obstetric violence. Based on family support during adolescence, the risk of obstetric violence in the "Strongly supportive" group was only 0.029 times that of the "Very unsupportive" control group. Women in other age groups are at higher risk of obstetric violence than women aged ≥ 45 years. The qualitative research has analyzed five themes: needs to be strengthened humanistic care, process that needs optimization, culture of obstetric violence, needs to be strengthened human resources, and needs to be strengthened medical facilities.
conclusionThe current incidence of obstetric violence is moderately common level, multilevel measures are urgently needed. Efforts should focus on promoting the coverage of the "Internet + Prenatal Education" program in rural areas to raise maternal awareness. Concurrently, training for medical staff should be enhanced, and preventive measures should be incorporated into healthcare quality assessment systems.
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.