ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Birth preparedness among women in early labor: A qualitative study in Durban, South Africa.
Article in Women's health (London, England). 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe high maternal and neonatal deaths recorded in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in Africa, present a serious challenge. Sub-Saharan countries still record the highest mortality ratio and even the highest in the developing world. It is reported that five major complications such as obstructed labor, unsafe abortion, high blood pressure during pregnancy, hemorrhage, and infection are responsible for this high mortality rate, which could be prevented through birth preparedness program, adequate health education, and information sharing, including the use of social media in attempt to educate every expectant woman regarding birth preparedness.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess birth preparedness among women in early labor at selected hospitals.
designA qualitative descriptive approach.
methodsThis was a descriptive qualitative research study, conducted among expectant women in early labor and three focus group discussions. Data were collected and analyzed from participants using face-to-face interviews and focus group discussions. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Participants for this study were pregnant women in early labor with gestational ages between 36 and 41 weeks, as the study excluded the mothers who were in preterm labor.
resultsNine themes emerged from the data: understanding of birth preparedness, perceived benefits of birth preparedness, women's responsibilities in birth preparedness, roles of healthcare workers in birth preparedness, timing of birth preparedness activities, women's choices regarding delivery location, pregnancy complication readiness, sources of information on motherhood and birth preparedness, and barriers to birth preparedness. Several categories emerged under each theme, and the results revealed that understanding of birth preparedness was associated with mental, emotional, financial, and physical preparedness. Participants reported barriers associated with budget limitations, lack of information, healthcare workers' attitudes, unplanned pregnancies, and cultural beliefs. Healthcare workers were abusive and displayed negative attitudes toward expectant women.
conclusionChallenges affecting the status of birth preparedness among expectant mothers can be understood and therefore preventable. Interventions need to enforce already existing maternity health protocols and leverage innovation and technology to reduce the morbidity and mortality of pregnant women and neonates.
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.