↓ Skip to main content

Expanding the agenda for addressing mistreatment in maternity care: a mapping review and gender analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
376 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Expanding the agenda for addressing mistreatment in maternity care: a mapping review and gender analysis
Published in
Reproductive Health, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12978-018-0584-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Myra L. Betron, Tracy L. McClair, Sheena Currie, Joya Banerjee

Abstract

This paper responds to the global call to action for respectful maternity care (RMC) by examining whether and how gender inequalities and unequal power dynamics in the health system undermine quality of care or obstruct women's capacities to exercise their rights as both users and providers of maternity care. We conducted a mapping review of peer-reviewed and gray literature to examine whether gender inequality is a determinant of mistreatment during childbirth. A search for peer-reviewed articles published between January 1995 and September 2017 in PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases, supplemented by an appeal to experts in the field, yielded 127 unique articles. We reviewed these articles using a gender analysis framework that categorizes gender inequalities into four key domains: access to assets, beliefs and perceptions, practices and participation, and institutions, laws, and policies. A total of 37 articles referred to gender inequalities in the four domains and were included in the analysis. The mapping indicates that there have been important advances in documenting mistreatment at the health facility, but less attention has been paid to addressing the associated structural gender inequalities. The limited evidence available shows that pregnant and laboring women lack information and financial assets, voice, and agency to exercise their rights to RMC. Women who defy traditional feminine stereotypes of chastity and serenity often experience mistreatment by providers as a result. At the same time, mistreatment of women inside and outside of the health facility is normalized and accepted, including by women themselves. As for health care providers, gender discrimination is manifested through degrading working conditions, lack of respect for their abilities, violence and harassment,, lack of mobility in the community, lack of voice within their work setting, and limited training opportunities and professionalization. All of these inequalities erode their ability to deliver high quality care. While the evidence base is limited, the literature clearly shows that gender inequality-for both clients and providers-contributes to mistreatment and abuse in maternity care. Researchers, advocates, and practitioners need to further investigate and build upon lessons from the broader gender equality, violence prevention, and rights-based health movements to expand the agenda on mistreatment in childbirth and develop effective interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 376 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 376 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 60 16%
Researcher 46 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 9%
Student > Bachelor 28 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 24 6%
Other 50 13%
Unknown 135 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 86 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 46 12%
Social Sciences 42 11%
Psychology 17 5%
Arts and Humanities 7 2%
Other 33 9%
Unknown 145 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,800,408
of 25,137,221 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#307
of 1,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,893
of 340,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#13
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,137,221 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,572 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.