Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effectiveness of Nurses as Providers of Birth Labor Support in North American Hospitals<SUBTITLE>A Randomized Controlled Trial</SUBTITLE>

Hodnett, Ellen D.·2002·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: North American cesarean delivery rates have risen dramatically since the 1960s, without concomitant improvements in perinatal or maternal health. A Cochrane Review concluded that continuous caregiver support during labor has many benefits, including reduced likelihood of cesarean delivery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of nurses as providers of labor support in North American hospitals. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial with prognostic stratification by center and parity. Women were enrolled during a 2-year period (May 1999 to May 2001) and followed up until 6 to 8 postpartum weeks. SETTING: Thirteen US and Canadian hospitals with annual cesarean delivery rates of at least 15%. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6915 women who had a live singleton fetus or twins, were 34 weeks' gestation or more, and were in established labor at randomization. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive usual care (n = 3461) or continuous labor support by a specially trained nurse (n = 3454) during labor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was cesarean delivery rate. Other outcomes included intrapartum events and indicators of maternal and neonatal morbidity, both immediately after birth and in the first 6 to 8 postpartum weeks. RESULTS: Data were received for all 6915 women and their infants (n = 6949). The rates of cesarean delivery were almost identical in the 2 groups (12.5% in the continuous labor support group and 12.6% in the usual care group; P =.44). There were no significant differences in other maternal or neonatal events during labor, delivery, or the hospital stay. There were no significant differences in women's perceived control during childbirth or in depression, measured at 6 to 8 postpartum weeks. All comparisons of women's likes and dislikes, and their future preference for amount of nursing support, favored the continuous labor support group. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitals characterized by high rates of routine intrapartum interventions, continuous labor support by nurses does not affect the likelihood of cesarean delivery or other medical or psychosocial outcomes of labor and birth.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.288.11.1373

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 159

Metadata

Authors
Hodnett, E. D.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2002-09-18
Volume
288
Issue
11
Pages
1373
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2134247001
Cited by
159
References
2
FWCI
10.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effectiveness of Nurses as Providers of Birth Labor Support in North American Hospitals<SUBTITLE>A Randomized Controlled Trial</SUBTITLE>. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.288.11.1373
The paper
Hodnett, E. D. (2002). Effectiveness of Nurses as Providers of Birth Labor Support in North American Hospitals<SUBTITLE>A Randomized Controlled Trial</SUBTITLE>. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.288.11.1373

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.