ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Differences in hospital prenatal care between immigrant and native women in France: a qualitative study within the BiP research on racial implicit bias in perinatal care.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundAs of 2023, 25.5% of live births in France are from mothers who were born abroad. Women born in sub-Saharan Africa are especially at risk of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Intermediate explanatory factors probably include access to and quality of care. The BiP multidisciplinary mixed-methods project sought to explore implicit racial biases among prenatal practitioners as one of the first approaches to this issue in France. The qualitative component we present here aimed to explore the clinical relationship between women from different migration backgrounds and healthcare providers as well as possible racial-based differential care in the setting of prenatal care.
methodsA sociological qualitative study was conducted in three public maternity units in the Paris area among 6 obstetrician-gynaecologists, 6 midwives, 6 anaesthesiologists, and 148 pregnant women. The study was based on audio-recorded prenatal consultations and self-confrontation interviews with practitioners. Consultations and interviews were analysed thematically.
resultsThe countries of birth and social positions of the participating women were globally similar to those of the pregnant women seen in each maternity unit. The content of care was globally controlled by healthcare providers and consultations were slightly longer for immigrant than native women; the explanations they provided were appropriate to women’s level of understanding. The prenatal follow-up, when standardised, left little room for differential care. Nonetheless, the tone of voice and the type of jokes showed the salience of the social relations of race and class, beyond the strict framework of the care relationship. A few instances of racism in care were identified and analysed, but their consideration by the institution was non-existent.
conclusionsFrench research is beginning to produce data on racial discrimination in healthcare, and this qualitative study provides an in-depth understanding of mechanisms leading to less adequate care, which was not an everyday occurrence. Despite the inclusion bias inherent in this type of approach, this study produced original results about the differential care of women who are immigrant during hospital prenatal care.
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.