The DOI matches its Crossref record; 94 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women
Abstract
Background Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care. Objectives To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Main results We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e., regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and overall fetal loss and neonatal death (fetal loss was assessed by gestation using 24 weeks as the cut-off for viability in many countries) using the GRADE methodology: All primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary o…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Several studies conducted in Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries have shown high satisfaction levels in women who were monitored in this way. 4,7”
From Comprehensive maternity support and shared care in Switzerland: Comparison of levels of satisfaction (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“The planning, coordination and delivery of women ' s health care by a midwife through pregnancy, intrapartum and postpartum care according to the woman-centred care model has a favourable impact on obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared to other models of care. 4”
From Comprehensive maternity support and shared care in Switzerland: Comparison of levels of satisfaction (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“These data underscore the bene fi cial effects of perinatal care provided by the midwife on satisfaction in various cultural and linguistic contexts. 4,15”
From Comprehensive maternity support and shared care in Switzerland: Comparison of levels of satisfaction (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“In terms of perinatal morbidity, no signi fi cant difference was recorded between the two types of care, which matches the results of past studies 4 and con fi rms the safety of CSC follow-up.”
From Comprehensive maternity support and shared care in Switzerland: Comparison of levels of satisfaction (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“In terms of perinatal morbidity, no signi fi cant difference was recorded between the two types of care, which matches the results of past studies 4 and con fi rms the safety of CSC follow-up.”
From Comprehensive maternity support and shared care in Switzerland: Comparison of levels of satisfaction (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“Several studies show that women who have experienced relational continuity models of care are more likely to be satis fi ed with their care than women who have experienced other types of care (Huber and Sandall, 2009; Aune et al., 2012; Sandall et al., 2015).”
From Women's experiences of home visits by midwives in the early postnatal period (2016) · cites this paper as Sandall et al., 2015
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
Continuity of caregivers for care during pregnancy and childbirth
HODNETT, E. D. (2000) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000062 · Cited by 73
RetractedHoffmann, T. C., Glasziou, P. P., Boutron, I., Milne, R., Perera, R., Moher, D., Altman, D. G., Barbour, V., Macdonald, H., Johnston, M., et al. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g1687 · Cited by 10,548
Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review
Haggerty, J. L., Reid, R. J., Freeman, G. K., Starfield, B. H., Adair, C. E., & McKendry, R. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7425.1219 · Cited by 2,374
Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women
Sandall, J., Soltani, H., Gates, S., Shennan, A. H., & Devane, D. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004667.pub3 · Cited by 1,264
Self-citationBirthplace in England Collaborative Group (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d7400 · Cited by 833
Interpersonal Continuity of Care and Care Outcomes: A Critical Review
Saultz, J. W. (2005) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.285 · Cited by 638
Midwife‐led versus other models of care for childbearing women
Hatem, M., Sandall, J., Devane, D., Soltani, H., & Gates, S. (2008) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004667.pub2 · Cited by 621
Self-citationDefining and Measuring Interpersonal Continuity of Care
Saultz, J. W. (2003) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.23 · Cited by 588
Gaps in the continuity of care and progress on patient safety
Cook, R. I. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7237.791 · Cited by 575
Interpersonal Continuity of Care and Patient Satisfaction: A Critical Review
Saultz, J. W. (2004) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.91 · Cited by 514
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Begley, 2011, Comparison of midwife-led and consultant-led care of healthy women at low risk of childbirth complications in the Republic of Ireland: a randomised trial, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 11, 85, 10.1186/1471-2393-11-85 · DOI
- Flint, 1988, Know your midwife, Nursing Times, 84, 28
- Flint, 1987, The 'Know your Midwife' Report
- Kenny, 1994, Final Report. Westmead Hospital Team Midwifery Project Evaluation
- Flood, 2012, Serious adverse event monitoring in a RCT of caseload midwifery (COSMOS), Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 48, 113
- McLachlan, 2011, A randomised controlled trial of caseload midwifery for women at low risk of medical complications (COSMOS): Maternal and infant outcomes, Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 47, 33
- McLachlan, 2012, A randomised controlled trial of caseload midwifery for women at low risk of medical complications (COSMOS): Women's satisfaction with care, Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 48, 41
- Hartz, 2012, Does caseload midwifery reduce caesarean section operation rates: The m@ngo trial, Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 48, 27
- Cheyne, 1996, Midwife managed care: results of a randomised controlled trial of 1299 women, Prenatal and Neonatal Medicine, 1, 129
- Shields, 1996, Women's satisfaction and continuity of care with midwife managed care, Prenatal and Neonatal Medicine, 1, 320
- Bernitz, 2012, Is the operative delivery rate in low-risk women dependent on birth care level? A randomised controlled trial, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 91, 45
- Klein, 1984, Care in a birth room vs a conventional setting: a controlled trial, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 131, 1461
- Vries, 2001, Birth by Design: Pregnancy, Maternity Care and Midwifery in North America and Northern Europe
- Flint, 1987, The 'Know your Midwife' Report
- Freeman, 2007, Continuity of Care 2006: What Have We Learned Since 2000 and What are Policy Imperatives Now? Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R & D (NCCSDO)
- McCourt, 2006, Working with women: developing continuity in practice, 141
- 2001, The National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report
- The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager (RevMan) 2014
- Sandall, 2001, Evaluation of the Albany Midwifery Practice: Final Report
- Schunemann, 2009, GRADE: from grading the evidence to developing recommendations. A description of the system and a proposal regarding the transferability of the results of clinical research to clinical practice, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen, 103, 391
- Young, 1997, The costs to the NHS of maternity care: midwife-managed vs shared, British Journal of Midwifery, 5, 465, 10.12968/bjom.1997.5.8.465 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women
Sandall, J., Soltani, H., Gates, S., Shennan, A. H., & Devane, D. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004667.pub3 · Cited by 1,264
Self-citationMidwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women
Sandall, J., Soltani, H., Gates, S., Shennan, A., & Devane, D. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004667.pub5 · Cited by 906
Self-citationInterventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies
Betrán, A. P., Temmerman, M., Kingdon, C., Mohiddin, A., Opiyo, N., Torloni, M. R., Zhang, J., Musana, O., Wanyonyi, S., Gülmezoglu, A. M., et al. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31927-5 · Cited by 626
Mapping integration of midwives across the United States: Impact on access, equity, and outcomes
Vedam, S., Stoll, K. H., MacDorman, M. F., Declercq, E. R., Cramer, R. A., Cheyney, M. J., Fisher, T. J., Butt, E., Yang, Y. T., & Kennedy, H. P. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0192523 · Cited by 254
The Mothers on Respect (MOR) index: measuring quality, safety, and human rights in childbirth
Vedam, S., Stoll, K. H., Rubashkin, N. A., Martin, K., Miller-Vedam, Z., Hayes-Klein, H., & Jolicoeur, G. (2017) · SSM - Population Health · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2017.01.005 · Cited by 224
Metadata
- Authors
- Sandall, J., Soltani, H., Gates, S., Shennan, A., & Devane, D.
- Affiliations
- St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
- Sheffield Hallam University (GB)
- University of Warwick (GB)
- King's College London (GB)
- Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
- Published
- 2015-09-15
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- CD004667-CD004667
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4232203714
- Cited by
- 514
- References
- 94
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 5
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- new_version (2016-04-28)
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0514-10145, 10/4001/02)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
- Keywords
- models of care, childbirth, midwifery, regional analgesia, epidural analgesia, caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth, preterm birth, fetal death, neonatal death, perineal trauma, normal delivery, maternal morbidity, psychosocial outcomes, maternal satisfaction
- MeSH terms
- Amnion, Cesarean Section, Continuity of Patient Care, Episiotomy, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Midwifery, Postnatal Care, Pregnancy, Prenatal Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Analgesia, Obstetrical, Patient Satisfaction, Models, Organizational, Perinatal Care
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
