ArticlePloS one2026
Antenatal education for labour and postpartum pain: A scoping review of content, delivery approaches, evidence gaps, and lived experiences.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPain during labour and the postpartum period is a complex and multidimensional experience. Antenatal education programmes aim to prepare individuals for childbirth and early parenthood; however, the extent to which these programmes address labour and postpartum pain management, and how women experience this education, remains unclear. This scoping review aimed to map the content, delivery characteristics, and evidence gaps of antenatal education programmes addressing labour and postpartum pain, including women's lived experiences.
methodsThis review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. The protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework (6597j). Twelve electronic databases were systematically searched in November 2025. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods primary studies examining antenatal education programmes with a focus on labour or postpartum pain were included. A narrative synthesis was undertaken to map intervention content, delivery approaches, and pain-related outcomes and experiences.
resultsA total of 5,959 records were identified from the search strategy. A total of 17 articles met the eligibility and inclusion criteria, including seven randomised controlled trials, seven quasi-experimental studies, one pre-post study, and two qualitative studies. The content and structure of antenatal education interventions between studies was heterogenous. Common themes included the distinction between "true and false labour pain" and breathing exercises. Qualitative findings highlighted women's perceived improvements in pain coping, confidence, sense of control, and use of non-pharmacological strategies during labour.
conclusionAntenatal education programmes contain limited information on labour and postpartum pain management, with little consistency across interventions. While non-pharmacological strategies appear valuable in supporting coping and confidence during labour, pain mechanisms and postpartum pain remain under-addressed. Incorporating pain-focused education such as pain neuroscience principles may enhance antenatal education and support more effective pain management. Further research is required to develop and evaluate consistent, evidence-based antenatal education approaches that address both labour and postpartum pain.
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.