Trial reportBMJ global health2026
Implementation of a decision aid to promote shared decision-making on mode of birth in low-risk pregnant women: a cross-sectional study within the QUALI-DEC hybrid trial.
Trial report in BMJ global health, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionImplementing shared decision-making (SDM) in maternity care remains challenging in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Decision aids can support SDM, but evidence on their effectiveness in such settings is limited. We assessed the impact of a decision analysis tool (DAT) for pregnant women on mode of birth (MOB) within the QUALIty DECision-making project, a multisite, multicountry pragmatic trial to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey among postpartum women considered at low risk for caesarean section in early pregnancy and who delivered in 32 hospitals across Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand and Viet Nam. Associations between DAT exposure and selected outcomes were analysed using multilevel, multivariate regression models adjusting for confounders and cluster effects.
resultsOf 2368 women included, 249 (11%) had used it outside antenatal care visits, 212 (9%) had heard of but not used it, and 1907 (80%) had never heard of the DAT. Compared with women who had never heard of the DAT, users were more likely to identify at least three risks/benefits of each MOB (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.8; p=0.001) and to communicate their preferred MOB to providers (aOR 2.3; 95% CI 1.5 to 3.6; p<0.001). DAT users were less likely to prefer caesarean section in late pregnancy (aOR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2 to 0.8; p=0.006) and reported higher birth experience and satisfaction scores (adjusted β=1.9; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.3; p=0.006).
conclusionsThe use of the DAT was associated with improved knowledge, communication of birth preferences, lower caesarean preference and greater satisfaction, without adverse outcomes. Findings suggest that decision aids can strengthen SDM and promote respectful, women-centred maternity care in LMICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN67214403.
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.