Midwives’ views towards women using mHealth and eHealth to self-monitor their pregnancy: A systematic review of the literature
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: There are many mobile telephone apps to help women self-monitor aspects of pregnancy and maternal health. This literature review aims to understand midwives' perspectives on women self-monitoring their pregnancy using eHealth and mHealth, and establish gaps in research. METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO were systematically searched on midwifery, eHealth/mHealth and perspectives. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies published in English were considered for inclusion in the review, without geographical limitations. Relevant articles were critically appraised and narrative synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: Twelve relevant papers covering midwives' perspectives of the use of eHealth and mHealth by pregnant women were obtained for inclusion in this review. Seven of these publications focused on midwives' views of eHealth, and five on their perspectives of mHealth interventions. The studies included demonstrate that midwives generally hold ambivalent views towards the use of eHealth and mHealth technologies in antenatal care. Often, midwives acknowledged the potential benefits of such technologies, such as their ability to modernise antenatal care and to help women make more informed decisions about their pregnancy. However, midwives were quick to point out the risks and limitations of these, such as the accuracy of conveyed information, and negative impacts on the patient-professional relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Post-COVID-19, where technology is continuously developing, there is a compelling need for studies that investigate the role of eHealth and mHealth in self-monitoring pregnancy, and the consequences this has for pregnant women, health professionals and organisations, as well as midwifery curricula.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Healthcare professionals have mixed views in relation to patients resorting to the internet and mobile apps, with reservations about sources and accuracy, yet highlighting that active patient engagement can support a positive patient-physician interaction.
“Healthcare professionals have mixed views in relation to patients resorting to the internet [114] and mobile apps [115], with reservations about the sources and accuracy of information, yet highlighting that active patient engagement can support a positive patient-physician interaction [116,117].”
From Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and the Internet of Things: A Scoping Review (2024) · cites this paper as [115]
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823 · see citing works
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042 · see citing works
Eysenbach, G. (2001) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3.2.e20 · Cited by 2,449 · see citing works
The digitally engaged patient: self-monitoring and self-care in the digital health era
Lupton, D. (2013) · Social Theory & Health · doi:10.1057/sth.2013.10 · Cited by 728 · see citing works
Quantifying the body: monitoring and measuring health in the age of mHealth technologies
Lupton, D. A. (2013) · Critical Public Health · doi:10.1080/09581596.2013.794931 · Cited by 650 · see citing works
eHealth as the Next-Generation Perinatal Care: An Overview of the Literature
van den Heuvel, J. F. M., Groenhof, T. K. J., Veerbeek, J. H. W., van Solinge, W. W., Lely, A. T., Franx, A., & Bekker, M. N. (2018) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.9262 · Cited by 320 · see citing works
Utilization and Content Evaluation of Mobile Applications for Pregnancy, Birth, and Child Care
Lee, Y., & Moon, M. (2016) · Healthcare Informatics Research · doi:10.4258/hir.2016.22.2.73 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
“Maternal Devices”, Social Media and the Self-Management of Pregnancy, Mothering and Child Health
Johnson, S. A. (2014) · Societies · doi:10.3390/soc4020330 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Self-regulatory failure: A review with clinical implications
Kirschenbaum, D. S. (1987) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/0272-7358(87)90005-5 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Willcox, J. C., van der Pligt, P., Ball, K., Wilkinson, S. A., Lappas, M., McCarthy, E. A., & Campbell, K. J. (2015) · JMIR mhealth and uhealth · doi:10.2196/mhealth.4869 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Slater, H., Dear, B. F., Merolli, M. A., Li, L. C., & Briggs, A. M. (2016) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology · doi:10.1016/j.berh.2016.08.006 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Nacinovich, M. R. (2011) · Journal of Communications In Healthcare · doi:10.1179/175380611x12950033990296 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Lagan, B. M., Sinclair, M., & Kernohan, G. W. (2009) · Midwifery · doi:10.1016/j.midw.2009.07.002 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Soltani, H., Duxbury, A. M. S., Arden, M. A., Dearden, A., Furness, P. J., & Garland, C. (2015) · Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1155/2015/814830 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Dalton, J. A., Rodger, D., Wilmore, M., Skuse, A., Humphreys, S., Flabouris, M., & Clifton, V. L. (2014) · Women and Birth · doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2014.06.010 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Is self monitoring of blood pressure in pregnancy safe and effective?
Hodgkinson, J., Tucker, K. L., Crawford, C., Greenfield, S. M., Heneghan, C. J., Hinton, L., Khan, K. S., Locock, L., Mackillop, L. H., McCourt, C., et al. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g6616 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Graßl, N., Nees, J., Schramm, K., Spratte, J., Sohn, C., Schott, T. C., & Schott, S. (2018) · JMIR mhealth and uhealth · doi:10.2196/10063 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
What do obstetricians think about media influences on their patients?
Handfield, B., Turnbull, S., & Bell, R. J. (2006) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1479-828x.2006.00621.x · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Weston, C., & Anderson, J. L. (2014) · British Journal of Midwifery · doi:10.12968/bjom.2014.22.7.488 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Soltani, H., Furness, P. J., Arden, M. A., McSeveny, K., Garland, C., Sustar, H., & Dearden, A. M. (2012) · Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1155/2012/835464 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Lanssens, D., Vandenberk, T., Lodewijckx, J., Peeters, T., Storms, V., Thijs, I., Grieten, L., & Gyselaers, W. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/10887 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Wennberg, A.-L., Hörnsten, Å., & Hamberg, K. (2015) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-015-0523-2 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Should Doctors Still Measure Blood Pressure?
Pickering, T. G. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Hypertension · doi:10.1111/j.1524-6175.2006.05154.x · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Catan, G., Espanha, R., Rita, V. M., Toren, O., & CHINITZ, D. P. (2015) · Studies in health technology and informatics · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-512-8-813 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Information Technology and the National Centers of Excellence in Women's Health
Crandall, C. J., Zitzelberger, T., Rosenberg, M. A., et al. (2001) · Journal of Women s Health & Gender-Based Medicine · doi:10.1089/152460901750067115 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
How do health professionals acknowledge Web-based knowledge in pregnancy consultations?
Fredriksen, E. H., Moland, K. M., & Harris, J. (2018) · Health Care For Women International · doi:10.1080/07399332.2017.1423314 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
The Whole Nine Months and Then Some
Crum, J. A. (2000) · Health Care on the Internet · doi:10.1300/j138v04n02_09 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Pregnancy problems: answers on the internet?
Lagan, B. M., Sinclair, M., & Kernohan, G. W. (2007) · PubMed · Cited by 5 · see citing works
The impact of internet use on the client-professional relationship: A comparative analysis
Johnsen, H. L. (2014) · British Journal of Midwifery · doi:10.12968/bjom.2014.22.3.188 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- [4]Vohs KD Baumeister RF Baumesiter RF Vohs KD Understanding self-regulation: An introduction Handbook of Self-regulation: Research, Theory and Applications 2004 New York, NY Guildford Press
- [5]Baumeister RF The Cultural Animal: Human nature, meaning and social life 2005 New York, NY Oxford University Press
- [24]Aveyard H Doing a Literature Review in Health and Social Care: A Practical Guide 2014 Maidenhead, UK McGraw-Hill Education
- [25]Critical Appraisal Skils Programme CASP Appraisal Checklists 2017 Oxford, UK CASP http://www.caspuk.net/casp-tools-checklists. Accessed August 21, 2020
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and the Internet of Things: A Scoping Review
Graca, S., Alloh, F., Lagojda, L., Dallaway, A., Kyrou, I., Randeva, H. S., & Kite, C. (2024) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare12161671 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
A Chilean Survey of Perinatal Women and Health Care Professionals’ Views Towards Perinatal Apps
Franco, P., Olhaberry, M., Kelders, S., & Muzard, A. (2023) · mHealth · doi:10.21037/mhealth-22-37 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vickery, M., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Smith, G., Way, S., & Westwood, G.
- Affiliations
- Bournemouth University (GB)
- Florence Nightingale Foundation (GB)
- Venue
- European Journal of Midwifery
- Publisher
- European Publishing
- Published
- 2020-09-17
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- September
- Pages
- 1-11
- ISSN
- 2585-2906 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7839093
- OpenAlex
- W3092169533
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 3
- FWCI
- 1.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- European Journal of Midwifery (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Bournemouth University
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Keywords
- midwives' perceptions, mobile health, e-health, prenatal care, mobile health apps, patient-professional relationship, information accuracy, pregnant women
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
