ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Pain catastrophizing and its associated factors among puerperal women with vaginal birth : a cross-sectional study.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the prevalence of pain catastrophizing among women with vaginal birth and explore its associated factors.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, a total of 282 participants who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected by convenience sampling from Delivery Room Ward of a hospital in Sichuan Province. Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Pain Numerical Rating Scale, Social Support Rating Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Self-Efficacy Scale and general information questionnaire were used to assess pain catastrophizing (PC), pain intensity, social support, anxiety, depressive symptoms, pain self-efficacy and sociodemographic information of the participants, respectively. Data were collected in two stages: latent period of the first stage of labor (T1) and the second stage of labor (T2). According to the distribution and type of the data, the mean and standard deviation (SD), median and quartiles, frequency and percentages were used for statistical description. The generalized estimating equation (GEE) was used to analyze the associated factors of pain catastrophizing. Crossed-lagged regression was used to explore the relationship between pain intensity and pain catastrophizing.
resultsThe median and quartiles of PCS scores at T1 and T2 were 30.00 (21.00, 39.00) and 27.00 (17.00, 40.00) among the participants, respectively. The prevalence of pain catastrophizing at T1 and T2 was 29.08% and 29.43%, respectively. Chi-square test showed that the prevalence of pain catastrophizing at T2 was higher than that at T1 (χ
conclusionsThere is a high prevalence of pain catastrophizing in women with natural childbirth. Associated factors of pain catastrophizing among women with natural childbirth are multidimensional, including physiological (pain intensity), psychological (gestational age, anxiety, depressive symptoms, pain self-efficacy) and socio-demographic factors (accompanying family members during delivery), suggesting that early evaluation of mental health condition of pregant women should be implemented and targeted interventions should be taken even if during pregnancy by health care workers. During labour, close attention should be paid to the mother's recognition of pain and appropriate measures taken promptly to prevent the occurrence of pain catastrophizing.
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.