LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects: RG
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Atkinson RL, Atkinson RC, Smith EE et al. 1996 Memory, In: Hilgards (ed.) Introduction to psychology. Harcourt Brace, Orlando
    • Audit Commission 1997 First class delivery: improving maternity services in England and Wales. Audit Commission, London
    • Blanche G, Lavender T, Alfirevic Z et al. 1998 Dysfunctional labour: a randomised trial. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 105: 117-120
    • Brown S, Lumley J 1994 Satisfaction with care in labour and birth: a survey of 790 Australian women. Birth 21: 4-13
    • Brucker MC, MacMullen NJ 1987 Delivery scripts: fantasy versus reality. Points of View 24: 20-21
    • Burns N, Grove S 1995 Understanding nursing research. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia
    • Churchill H 1995 The conflict between lay and professional views of labor. Nursing Times 91 32-33
    • Charles J, Curtis L 1994 Birth afterthoughts: a listening and information service. British Journal of Midwifery 2: 331- 334
    • Davenport-Slack B, Boylan C 1974 Psychological corelates of childbirth pain. Psychosomatic Medicine 36: 215-219
    • Department of Health 1993 Changing childbirth, report of the expert maternity group. HMSO, London
    • Gibb DMF 1994 Operative delivery in safe practice. In: Clemence RV (ed.) Obstetrics and gynaecology; a medico legal handbook. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh.
    • Graham H, Oakley A 1981 Competing ideologies of reproduction: medical and maternal perspectives on pregnancy and birth. In: Roberts H (ed.) Women, health and reproduction. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
    • Green JM, Coupland BA, Kitzinger JV 1990 Expectations, experiences and psychological outcomes of childbirth: a prospective study of 825 women. Birth 17: 15-24
    • Guba EG 1990 The paradigm dialog. Sage, Newbury Park
    • Hodnett ED, Simmons-Tropea DA 1987 The labour agentry scale: psychometric 'properties of an instrument measuring control during childbirth. Research in Nursing & Health 10: 301-310
    • House of Commons Social Services Committee 1980 Perinatal and neonatal mortality, second report: 1979-1980. HSMO, London
    • House of Commons Social Services Committee 1984 Perinatal and neonatal mortality report: follow-up, third report: 1983-1984. HSMO, London
    • House of Commons Social Services Committee 1988 Perinatal, neonatal and infant mortality, first report: 1988-1989. HSMO, London
    • House of Commons Health Committee 1991-1992 Maternity services, second report. HSMO, London
    • Humenick S, Bugen L 1981 Mastery: the key to childbirth satisfaction? A study. Birth and the Family Journal 8: 84- 89
    • Jacoby A 1987 Women's preferences for and satisfaction with current procedures in childbirth - findings from a national study. Midwifery 3: 117-124
    • Kirkham M 1989 Midwives and infommtion-giving during labour. In: Robinson S, Thomson AM (eds) Midwives, research and childbirth vol 1. Chapman and Hall, London
    • Kitzinger S 1980 Pregnancy and childbirth. Penguin, Harmondsworth
    • Lavender T 1997 Can midwives respond to the needs of fathers? British Journal of Midwifery 5: 92-96
    • Lavender T, Alfirevic ZT, Walkinshaw S 1998 Partogram action line study: a randomised trial, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 105: 976-980
    • Martin C 1990 How do you count maternal satisfaction? A user commissioned survey of maternity services. In: Roberts H (ed.) Women's health counts. Routledge, London
    • Norris M 1981 Problems in the analysis of qualitative data - suggested solutions. Sociology 15: 337-351
    • Oakley A 1980 A woman confined. Martin Robertson, Oxford
    • Playle JF 1995 Humanism and positivism in nursing: contradictions and conflicts. Journal of Advanced Nursing 22: 979-984
    • Ralph K, Alexander J 1994 Borne under stress. Nursing Times 90: 28-30
    • Robson J 1995 Informed refusal. British Journal of Midwifety 3: 616-617
    • Simian P 1992 Just another day in a woman's life? Part II: nature and consistency of women's long-term memories of their first birth experiences. Birth 19: 64-81
    • Stolte K 1987 A comparison of women's expectations of labour with the actual event. Birth 14: 99-103
    • Szczepinska I 1995 Expectations nurtured in childbearing women. British Journal Midwifery 3: 574
    • Waldenstrom U, Borg I, Olsson B et al. 1996 The childbirth experience: a study of 295 new mothers Birth 23: 144- 153
    • I. Brown S. Lumley J. Satisfaction with care in labor and birth: A survey of 790 Australian women. Birth 1994;21:4-13.
    • ?. Audit Commission, First Class Delivery: Improving Maternity Services in England and Wales. London: Author, 1997: 1-98.
    • 3. Jacoby A. Women's preferences for and satisfaction with current procedures in childbirth-findings from a national study. Midwifery 1987;3:117-124.
    • 4. Hayward J, Chalmers B. Obstetricians' and mothers' perceptions of obstetric events. J Psychosom Obstm Gynaecol 1990; 11:57-71.
    • 5. Llewellyn-Jones D. Fundamentals of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Vol.!. 4th ed. London: Faber & Faber, 1986.
    • 6. Philpott RH. Graphic records in labour. Br Med J 1972;4: 163-165.
    • 7. Philpott RH, Castle WM. Cervicographs in the management of labour in primigravidae. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw 1972a;79:599-602.
    • 8. Philpott RH, Castle WM. Cervicographs in the management of labour in primigravidae. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonly 1972b;79:592-598.
    • 9. World Health Organization Maternal Health and Safe Motherhood Programme. World Health Organization partograph in management of labour. Lancet 1994;343:1399-1404.
    • 10. O'Driscoll K. Foley M, Macdonald D. Active lnx-msenzw) oS \about as an alternative to cesarean section for dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1984;63:485-490.
    • II. Thornton J, Lilford R. Active management of labour: Current knowledge and research issues. BA4J 1994;309:366-369.
    • 12. Frigoletto FD Jr, Lieberman E. Lang JM. A clinical trial of active management of labor. N Engl J Med 1995;333:745-750.
    • 13. Lavender T. Alfirevic Z. Walkinshaw S. Partogratn action line study: A randomised trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105: 976-980.
    • 14. Noyes RW, Levy MI, Chase CL, Udry JR. Expectation fulfillment as a measure of patient satisfaction. Ain J Obstet 1974; 118:809-814.
    • 15. Polit DF, Hungler BP. Essentials of Nursing Research: Methods. Appraisal and Utilization. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1993.
    • 16. Hicks CM. Undertaking Midwifery Research. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1996.
    • 17. Lomas J. Dore S. Enkin M, Mitchell A. The Labor and Delivery Satisfaction Index: The development and evaluation of a soft outcome measure. Birth 1987;14:125-129.
    • 18. Shearer MIt. Commentary: How well does the LADS! measure satisfaction with labor and delivery'? Birth 1987;14: 130 131.
    • 19. Oakley A. Women Confined . Oxfmd: Martin Robertson, 1980.
    • 20. Locker D, Duni D. Theoretical and methodological issues in sociological studies of consumer satisfaction with medical care. Soc Sri Med 1978;12:283-292,
    • 21. Bramadat Ii. Driedger M. Satisfaction with childbirth: Theories and methods of measurement. Birth 1993;20:22T29.
    • 22. Waldenstrom U. Borg 1, Olsson B, Skold M. Wall S. The childbirth experience: A study of 295 new mothers. Birth 1996;23: ( 44-153.
    • 23. Avis M. Bond M, Arthur A. Questioning patient satisfaction: An empirical investigation in two outpatient clinics. Sue Sri Med 1997;44:85-92.
    • 24. Linder-Pelz S. Towards a theory of patient satisfaction. Soc Sci Med 1982a;16:577-5f52.
    • 25. Linder-Pelz S. Social psycholcgical determinants of patient satisfaction; A test of five hypotheses. Soc Sci Med 1982b; 16:583-589.
    • 26. Kerssens11, Patient satisfaction with home-birth care in Netherlands. J Am Nurs 1994:20:344-350.
    • 27. Symon A. Expectations: Can we meet them? Br .1 Midwifery 1995:6:330-333.
    • 28. Shearer MH. The difficulty of defining and measuring satisfaction with perinatal care. Birth 1983;10:77.
    • 29. Strasser S. Davis R. Measuring Patient Satigaction for Improved Patient Services. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administt-ation Press, 1991.
    • 30. Blanche G,LavenderT, Alfirevic Z, Walkinshaw S. Dy.sfunctional labour: A randomised trial. Br J Gime: Gynaecol 1995; 105:117-120.
    • trial to evaluate the 2-hour versus the 4-hour action line
    • . La k ender T. Wall y mahmed All, Walkinshaw SA. Managing labor using partograms With different action lines: A prospective study of woolen's views. Birth )999;26:89-96.
    • 2. Lavender T, Alfirevic Z. Walkinshaw S. Partogram action line studs : A randomised trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol l998:105: 976 950.
    • 3. Hodneu ED, Hannah ME, Weston JA. et al. Women's evalUations of induction of labor versus expectant management for prclabor rupture of the membranes at term. girth 1997:24: 2 4-720.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article