Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41919305›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

Acceptability of the WHO labor care guide among midwives in Tanzania: an exploratory qualitative study.

Nyabwire Joel Lukumai, Israel P Nyarubeli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Nyabwire Joel LukumaiSchool of Public Health and Social Sciences, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Israel P NyarubeliDepartment of Psychosocial Sciences, Faculty of Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The World Health Organization's Labor Care Guide (LCG) is a next-generation partograph designed to improve intrapartum care by promoting accurate monitoring, critical thinking, and woman-centered practices. Evidence from low- and middle-income countries suggests that the LCG is generally practicable and acceptable among maternity care providers. Tanzania adopted the LCG in 2023, but little is known about its acceptability among frontline midwives in routine practice. Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study in a Municipality located in northwestern Tanzanian between May and June 2025. Twenty participants (midwives) from public health facilities were purposively selected. Data were collected through in-depth interviews guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA), focusing on perceived effectiveness, burden, and intervention coherence. Interviews were transcribed, translated, and analyzed using Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis approach. Results: Three major themes emerged: (i) Conclusion: Participants generally perceived the LCG as acceptable tool for improving intrapartum care. However, contextual barriers such as increased workload, inadequate staffing, and integration into existing workflows were highlighted. Policy efforts should prioritize on-the-job training, workflow adaptation, and regular supportive supervision. Future research should employ mixed-methods and longitudinal designs to assess sustained LCG acceptability and effect on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelLabor, ObstetricMidwiferyAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicPregnancyQualitative ResearchTanzaniaWorld Health Organizationacceptabilityintrapartum carelabor care guidemidwivesqualitative studyTanzania

Identifiers

PMID41919305
PMCPMC13034876

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.