SynthesisArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2026
Factors influencing turnover intention among midwives: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAttrition of midwives is a growing global challenge that threatens the sustainability of maternal and newborn health services. Turnover intention (TI) is a strong predictor of actual workforce exit and often develops long before resignation. Despite increasing research on this topic, evidence on the factors associated with TI among midwives remains fragmented. This systematic review aimed to identify, categorize, and synthesize factors associated with turnover intention among midwives worldwide.
methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for quantitative studies published between January 2010 and August 2025. Eligible studies examined at least one factor associated with turnover intention among midwives and reported midwife-specific data. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for cross-sectional studies. Due to heterogeneity in outcome measures and reported factors, a narrative synthesis was performed. Identified factors were organized using the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model.
findingsA total of 30 studies from 17 countries, encompassing 17,608 midwives, were included in this review. The synthesis identified 121 factor occurrences associated with TI. Guided by the JD-R model, these factors were categorized into three primary domains: Job Demands (e.g., high workload, burnout, work-life conflict, and stressful work environments), Inadequate Job Resources (e.g., low job satisfaction, inadequate salary, lack of managerial support, and restricted autonomy), and Sociodemographic and Personal Factors. The findings indicate that TI is predominantly driven by the exhaustion from excessive job demands coupled with a lack of structural resources.
conclusionTurnover intention among midwives is a complex, multifactorial phenomenon deeply rooted in organizational and systemic structures rather than individual shortcomings. To effectively retain the midwifery workforce, policymakers and healthcare administrators must prioritize systemic improvements, including reducing excessive workloads, enhancing managerial and professional support, and fostering healthier work environments. Future research should focus on longitudinal and interventional studies to evaluate the effectiveness of specific retention strategies. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was not registered.
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.