Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 27

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Can birth outcome inequality be reduced using targeted caseload midwifery in a deprived diverse inner city population? A retrospective cohort study, London, UK

Hadebe, Ruth, Seed, Paul T, Essien, Diana, Headen, Kyle, Mahmud, Saheel, Owasil, Salwa, Fernandez Turienzo, Cristina, Stanke, Carla, Sandall, Jane, Bruno, Mara, Khazaezadeh, Nina, Oteng-Ntim, Eugene·2021·BMJ Open

Abstract

Objectives: (1) To report maternal and newborn outcomes of pregnant women in areas of social deprivation in inner city London. (2) To compare the effect of caseload midwifery with standard care on maternal and newborn outcomes in this cohort of women. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study. Setting: Four council wards (electoral districts) in inner city London, where over 90% of residents are in the two most deprived quintiles of the English Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) (2019) and the population is ethnically diverse. Participants: All women booked for antenatal care under Guys and St Thomas’ National Health Service Foundation Trust after 11 July 2018 (when the Lambeth Early Action Partnership (LEAP*) caseload midwifery team was implemented) until data collection 18 June 2020. This included 523 pregnancies in the LEAP area, of which 230 were allocated to caseload midwifery, and 8430 pregnancies from other areas. Main outcome measures: To explore if targeted caseload midwifery (known to reduce preterm birth) will improve important measurable outcomes (preterm birth, mode of birth and newborn outcomes). Results: There was a significant reduction in preterm birth rate in women allocated to caseload midwifery, when compared with those who received traditional midwifery care (5.1% vs 11.2%; risk ratio: 0.41; p=0.02; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.86; number needed to treat: 11.9). Caesarean section births were significantly reduced in women allocated to caseload midwifery care, when compared with traditional midwifery care (24.3% vs 38.0%; risk ratio: 0.64: p=0.01; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.90; number needed to treat: 7.4) including emergency caesarean deliveries (15.2% vs 22.5%; risk ratio: 0.59; p=0.03; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.94; number needed to treat: 10) without increase in neonatal unit admission or stillbirth. Conclusion: This study shows that a model of caseload midwifery care implemented in an inner city deprived community improves outcome by significantly reducing preterm birth and birth by caesarean section when compared with traditional care. This data trend suggests that when applied to targeted groups (women in higher IMD quintile and women of diverse ethnicity) that the impact of intervention is greater.

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 · 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049991

Cites

6 of 6 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

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?

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 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. 10.1371/journal.pone.0023163 · DOI
  2. Ene, 2019, Associations of socioeconomic deprivation and preterm birth with speech, language, and communication concerns among children aged 27 to 30 months, JAMA Netw Open, 2, 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.11027 · DOI
  3. 10.1542/peds.2017-0509 · DOI
  4. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012676 · DOI
  5. 10.1111/1471-0528.13059 · DOI
  6. Conti, 2016, The effects of two influential early childhood interventions on health and healthy behaviour, Econ J, 126, F28, 10.1111/ecoj.12420 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2005.10.007 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub5 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1016/j.jeconom.2009.09.023 · DOI
  10. 10.1002/14651858.CD012505.pub2 · DOI
  11. Ockenden D . Ockenden report: emerging findings and Reccommendations form the independent review of maternity services at the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, 2020. Available: https://www.donnaockenden.com/downloads/news/2020/12/ockenden-report.pdf
  12. Kildea, 2019, Reducing preterm birth amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander babies: a prospective cohort study, Brisbane, Australia, EClinicalMedicine, 12, 43, 10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.06.001 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.midw.2015.01.003 · DOI
  14. Homer, 2017, Midwifery continuity of carer in an area of high socio-economic disadvantage in London: a retrospective analysis of Albany midwifery practice outcomes using routine data (1997-2009), Midwifery, 48, 1, 10.1016/j.midw.2017.02.009 · DOI
  15. Kennedy, 2000, A model of exemplary midwifery practice: results of a Delphi study, J Midwifery Womens Health, 45, 4, 10.1016/S1526-9523(99)00018-5 · DOI
  16. Davis, 2010, Midwives and normalcy in childbirth: a phenomenologic concept development study, J Midwifery Womens Health, 55, 206, 10.1016/j.jmwh.2009.12.007 · DOI
  17. Phillippi, 2014, The 2012 American College of nurse-midwives core competencies for basic midwifery practice: history and revision, J Midwifery Womens Health, 59, 82, 10.1111/jmwh.12148 · DOI
  18. Rayment-Jones, 2020, Project 20: midwives' insight into continuity of care models for women with social risk factors: what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and how, Midwifery, 84, 10.1016/j.midw.2020.102654 · DOI
  19. McRae, 2016, Is model of care associated with infant birth outcomes among vulnerable women? A scoping review of midwifery-led versus physician-led care, SSM Popul Health, 2, 182, 10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.01.007 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1053/sper.2001.27548 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Georgiou, 2015, Predicting preterm labour: current status and future prospects, Dis Markers, 2015, 1, 10.1155/2015/435014 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1177/1753495X12473751 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1515/jpm-2012-0295 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Trumello C , Candelori C , Cofini M , et al . Mothers’ depression, anxiety, and mental representations after preterm birth: a study during the infant’s hospitalization in a neonatal intensive care unit. Front. Public Health 2018;6.doi:10.3389/fpubh.2018.00359 · DOI
  25. Jacob, 2017, Cost effects of preterm birth: a comparison of health care costs associated with early preterm, late preterm, and full-term birth in the first 3 years after birth, Eur J Health Econ, 18, 1041, 10.1007/s10198-016-0850-x · DOI
  26. 10.1542/peds.2006-3260 · DOI
  27. 10.1186/s12978-015-0043-6 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hadebe, R., Seed, P. T., Essien, D., Headen, K., Mahmud, S., Owasil, S., Fernandez Turienzo, C., Stanke, C., Sandall, J., Bruno, M., Khazaezadeh, N., & Oteng-Ntim, E.
Affiliations
  • Department of Women’s Health, Guy’s and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  • Department of Women and Children’s Health, King’s College London, London, UK
  • King’s College London School of Medicine, London, UK
  • Public Health, National Childrens Bureau, London, UK
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2021-11
Volume
11
Issue
11
Pages
e049991
ISSN
2044-6055
Cited by
27
References
6
Language
en
Funders
National Lottery Community Fund (N/A- not a direct funder of study)

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

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.