Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37716939›Full record

ReviewBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023

Access to support during childbirth?: women's preferences and experiences of support person integration in a cross-sectional facility-based survey.

Michelle K Nakphong, Patience A Afulani, James Opot, May Sudhinaraset

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

4 authors.

Michelle K NakphongDepartment of Medicine, Division of Prevention Science, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. Michelle.nakphong@ucsf.edu.
Patience A AfulaniDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
James OpotInnovations for Poverty Action, Nairobi, Kenya.
May SudhinarasetDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

Scientific and Technical CoreP2CHD041022 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Martha Jane Bailey · 2016 to 2026
$6.9M
CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR POPULATION TRAINING PROGRAMT32HD007545 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI HIRAM BELTRAN-SANCHEZ, Megan M Sweeney · 2001 to 2026
$4.1M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD041022NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007545
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntegrating support persons into maternity care, such as making them feel welcome or providing them with information, is positioned to increase support for women and improve birth outcomes. Little quantitative research has examined what support women need and how the healthcare system currently facilitates support for women. We introduce the Person-Centered Integration of Support Persons (PC-ISP) concept, based on a review of the literature and propose four PC-ISP domains-Welcoming environment, Decision-making support, Provision of information and education and Ability to ask questions and express concerns. We report on women's preferences and experiences of PC-ISP.

methodsWe developed PC-ISP measures based on the literature and applied these in a facility-based survey with 1,138 women after childbirth in six health facilities in Nairobi and Kiambu counties in Kenya from September 2019 to January 2020.

resultsWe found an unmet need for integrating support persons during childbirth. Between 73.6 and 93.6% of women preferred integration of support persons during maternity care, but only 45.3-77.9% reported to have experienced integration. Women who reported having a male partner support person reported more PC-ISP experiences (B0.13; 95% CI 0.02, 0.23) than those without. Employed women were more likely to report having the opportunity to consult support persons on decisions (aOR1.26; 95% CI 1.07, 1.50) and report that providers asked if support persons should be informed about their condition and care (aOR1.29; 95% CI 1.07, 1.55). Women with more providers attending birth were more likely to report opportunities to consult support persons on decisions (aOR1.53; 95% CI 1.09, 2.15) and that support persons were welcome to ask questions (aOR1.84, 95% CI 1.07, 2.54).

conclusionsGreater efforts to integrate support persons for specific roles, including decision-making support, bridging communication and advocacy, are needed to meet women's needs for support in maternity care.

Indexed as

Maternal Health ServicesCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansKenyaMalePregnancy

Identifiers

PMID37716939
PMCPMC10504704

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.