Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41397744›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Organising maternal and newborn care in high-income countries: a scoping review of organisational elements and their association with outcomes.

Jolanda Liebregts, Bahareh Goodarzi, Pim Valentijn, Soo Downe, Jan Jaap Erwich, George Burchell, Ronald Batenburg, Ank de Jonge, Corine J M Verhoeven, VOICE Study Group

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Socioeconomic and Geographical Analysis on Antenatal Care Visits in Indonesia: A Cross-sectional Study.International journal of community based nursing and midwifery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jolanda LiebregtsMidwifery Science, Amsterdam UMC Locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands j.d.liebregts@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-1729-145X
Bahareh GoodarziMidwifery Science, Amsterdam UMC Locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Pim ValentijnEssenburgh Research & Consultancy, Essenburgh Group, Harderwijk, Netherlands.
Soo DowneReaCH team, University of Central Lancashire, preston, UK.
Jan Jaap ErwichObstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1362-4501
George BurchellMedical Library, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Ronald BatenburgNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Ank de JongeMidwifery Science, Amsterdam UMC Locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Corine J M VerhoevenMidwifery Science, Amsterdam UMC Locatie VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
VOICE Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCountries face challenges in maternal and newborn care (MNC) regarding costs, workforce and sustainability. Organising integrated care is increasingly seen as a way to address these challenges. The evidence on the optimal organisation of integrated MNC in order to improve outcomes is limited.

objectives(1) To study associations between organisational elements of integrated care and maternal and neonatal health outcomes, experiences of women and professionals, healthcare costs and care processes and (2) to examine how the different dimensions of integrated care, as defined by the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care, are reflected in the literature addressing these organisational elements.

resultsWe included 288 papers and identified 23 organisational elements, grouped into 6 categories: personal continuity of care; interventions to improve interdisciplinary collaboration and coordination; care by a midwife; alternative payment models (non-fee-for-service); place of birth outside the obstetric unit and woman-centred care. Personal continuity, care by a midwife and births outside obstetric units were most consistently associated with improved maternal and newborn outcomes, positive experiences for women and professionals and potential cost savings, particularly where well-coordinated multidisciplinary care was established. Positive professional experiences of collaboration depended on clear roles, mutual trust and respectful interdisciplinary behaviour. Evidence on collaboration interventions and alternative payment models was inconclusive. Most studies emphasised clinical and professional aspects rather than organisational integration, with implementation barriers linked to prevailing biomedical system orientations.

conclusionsAlthough the literature provides substantial evidence of organisational elements that contribute to improved outcomes, a significant gap remains in understanding how to overcome the barriers in sustainable implementation of these elements within healthcare systems. Interpreted through a systems and transition science lens, these findings suggest that strengthening integrated maternity care requires system-level changes aligning with WHO policy directions towards midwifery models of person-centred care.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedDeveloped CountriesMaternal-Child Health ServicesMaternal Health ServicesContinuity of Patient CareFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMidwiferyPregnancyOBSTETRICSOrganisation of health servicesPatient-Centered CarePERINATOLOGY

Identifiers

PMID41397744
PMCPMC12706211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.