↓ Skip to main content

A descriptive analysis of midwifery education, regulation and association in 73 countries: the baseline for a post-2015 pathway

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, June 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 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
A descriptive analysis of midwifery education, regulation and association in 73 countries: the baseline for a post-2015 pathway
Published in
Human Resources for Health, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12960-016-0134-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sofia Castro Lopes, Andrea Nove, Petra ten Hoope-Bender, Luc de Bernis, Martha Bokosi, Nester T. Moyo, Caroline S. E. Homer

Abstract

Education, regulation and association (ERA) are the supporting pillars of an enabling environment for midwives to provide quality care. This study explores these three pillars in the 73 low- and middle-income countries who participated in the State of the World's Midwifery (SoWMy) 2014 report. It also examines the progress made since the previous report in 2011. A self-completion questionnaire collected quantitative and qualitative data on ERA characteristics and organisation in the 73 countries. The countries were grouped according to World Health Organization (WHO) regions. A descriptive analysis was conducted. In 82% of the participating countries, the minimum education level requirement to start midwifery training was grade 12 or above. The average length of training was higher for direct-entry programmes at 3.1 years than for post-nursing/healthcare provider programmes at 1.9 years. The median number of supervised births that must be conducted before graduation was 33 (range 0 to 240). Fewer than half of the countries had legislation recognising midwifery as an independent profession. This legislation was particularly lacking in the Western Pacific and South-East Asia regions. In most (90%) of the participating countries, governments were reported to have a regulatory role, but some reported challenges to the role being performed effectively. Professional associations were widely available to midwives in all regions although not all were exclusive to midwives. Compared with the 2011 SoWMy report, there is evidence of increasing effort in low- and middle-income countries to improve midwifery education, to strengthen the profession and to follow international ERA standards and guidelines. However, not all elements are being implemented equally; some variability persists between and within regions. The education pillar showed more systematic improvement in the type of programme and length of training. The reinforcement of regulation through the development of legislation for midwifery, a recognised definition and the strengthening of midwives' associations would benefit the development of other ERA elements and the profession generally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Bahamas 1 <1%
Unknown 160 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 14%
Researcher 20 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 7 4%
Other 34 21%
Unknown 45 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 41 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 17%
Social Sciences 17 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 47 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 16 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,635,427
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#305
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,316
of 354,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#10
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 354,671 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 66% of its contemporaries.