Home Birth in North America: Attitudes and Practice of US Certified Nurse‐Midwives and Canadian Registered Midwives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Scope of practice, competencies, and philosophy of maternity practice are similar among midwives in the United States and Canada. However, there are marked differences in intrapartum practice sites between registered midwives (RMs) and certified nurse-midwives (CNMs). METHODS: This study linked data from 2 national surveys: 1) a 2007 survey of CNM members of the American College of Nurse-Midwives (n = 1893); and 2) the Canadian Birth Place Study of maternity providers, including RM members of the Canadian Association of Midwives (n = 451) to compare the demographics, practice experience, and attitudes to home birth between these 2 types of North American midwives. A Provider Attitudes To Planned Home Birth scale-international (PAPHB-i) was developed for this analysis. Descriptive and bivariate analyses are presented. RESULTS: Educational exposure to planned home birth varied greatly when comparing CNMs and RMs, as did practice patterns regarding continuity of care, primary and gynecologic care, and involvement with research and teaching. Registered midwives were almost 4 times more likely than CNMs to have practiced in the home (99.1% vs 26.0%). Certified nurse-midwives scored significantly lower than RMs on the PAPHB-i scale (36.5 vs 41.0), indicating less favorable attitudes toward home birth overall. Certified nurse-midwives were less confident than RMs in their management skills for home birth practice. Age, exposure to planned home birth during midwifery education, and practice experience in the home setting emerged as significant covariates of attitudes toward home birth. Significantly more RMs and CNMs with home birth experience expressed concerns about disapproval of hospital-based peers, but they were significantly less likely to agree that midwives face other systemic barriers than CNMs with no home birth experience. DISCUSSION: Differences in favorability toward and confidence with practice during planned home births among CNMs and RMs were predicted associated with differences in educational and practice exposure to planned home birth. We recommend that clinical experiences and theoretical content about planned home birth and preparation for multidisciplinary collaboration across settings be integrated as essential and required components of all health professional education programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".