ArticleBMJ public health2025
Labour companionship and respectful treatment of women during childbirth: a cross-sectional study across 16 hospitals in Benin, Malawi, Tanzania and Uganda.
Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multi-faceted hospital-based intervention for intrapartum care in sub-Saharan Africa: a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy of a Mobile Health App in Promoting Breastfeeding and Young Child Feeding Practices in Pakistan: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Facilitators' experiences of co-designing an intrapartum care intervention in four sub-Saharan African countries: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Companion and Type of Delivery: Inequalities in Brazil Revealed by the National Health Survey - 2019.Journal of family & reproductive health · 2026Article
- Analysis of factors affecting companions' level of adherence to support roles during labor and childbirth: a mixed-methods study.SAGE open medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Evidence suggests that women value and benefit from having a labour companion during childbirth. However, the applicability of the evidence to low-income and lower-middle-income countries is limited and varies. Thus, we assessed the association between the presence of labour companions and mistreatment in 16 hospitals of Benin, Malawi, Tanzania and Uganda. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey using a validated questionnaire administered to women at discharge after birth between December 2021 and March 2024. The main outcomes were factor-weighted respectful treatment score and its subscores on maintained respect and dignity, privacy and maintained confidentiality and no physical and verbal abuse. The independent variable was labour companionship. We assessed the association between labour companionship and mistreatment using a linear regression model with fixed effects and cluster robust standard errors. Results: Of the 4006 included women, 39% (n=1573) had a companion during labour and/or birth. Women across the four countries and regardless of companions' presence reported high degrees of maintained privacy and confidentiality (subscores ranging between 9.5/10 in Benin to 9.9/10 in Malawi). The presence of a labour companion was significantly associated with the absence of physical and verbal abuse experiences (β=0.07; p=0.004; 95% CI: 0.02; 0.12). Conclusions: Our study adds evidence on the positive relation between labour companionship and physical and verbal abuse. The coverage of labour companionship was low across the four countries. We call for the implementation of labour companionship to allow for greater benefits of this practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.