{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,31]],"date-time":"2026-10-31T06:01:09Z","timestamp":1793426469021,"version":"4.5.0"},"reference-count":40,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2019,9,27]],"date-time":"2019-09-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1569542400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2019,9,27]],"date-time":"2019-09-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1569542400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Pregnancy Childbirth"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2019,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Risk perception in relation to pregnancy and birth is a complex process influenced by multiple personal, psychological and societal factors. Traditionally, the risk perception of healthcare professionals has been presented as more objective and authoritative than that of pregnant women. Doctors have been presented as more concerned with biomedical risk than midwives. Such dichotomies oversimplify and obscure the complexity of the process. This study examines pregnancy-related risk perception in women and healthcare professionals, and what women and professionals believe about each other\u2019s risk perception.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      A cross sectional survey of set in UK maternity services. Participants were doctors working in obstetrics (\n                      <jats:italic>N<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200953), midwives (\n                      <jats:italic>N<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200959), pregnant women (\n                      <jats:italic>N<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u200968). Participants were recruited in person from two hospitals. Doctors were also recruited online. Participants completed a questionnaire measuring the degree of perceived risk in various childbirth-related scenarios; and the extent to which they believed others agreed with them about the degree of risk generally involved in childbirth. Main outcome measures were the degree of risk perceived to the mother in baby in pregnancy scenarios, and beliefs about own perception of risk in comparison to their own group and other groups.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>There were significant differences in total risk scores between pregnant women, doctors and midwives in perception of risk to the mother in 68\/80 scenarios. Doctors most frequently rated risks lowest. Total scores for perceived risk to the baby were not significantly different. There was substantial variation within each group. There was more agreement on the ranking of scenarios according to risk. Each group believed doctors perceived most risk whereas actually doctors most frequently rated risks lowest. Each group incorrectly believed their peers rated risk similarly to themselves.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Individuals cannot assume others share their perception of risk or that they make correct assessments regarding others\u2019 risk perception. Further research should consider what factors are taken into account when making risk assessments,<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12884-019-2467-4","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2019,9,26]],"date-time":"2019-09-26T19:23:51Z","timestamp":1569525831000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":47,"title":["Pregnancy related risk perception in pregnant women, midwives &amp; doctors: a cross-sectional survey"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"19","author":[{"given":"Suzanne","family":"Lee","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Des","family":"Holden","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Rebecca","family":"Webb","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Susan","family":"Ayers","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2019,9,27]]},"reference":[{"key":"2467_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"253","DOI":"10.1080\/1366987042000270735","volume":"8","author":"T Horlick-Jones","year":"2005","unstructured":"Horlick-Jones T. Informal logic of risk: contingency and modes of practical reasoning. J Risk Res. 2005;8:253\u201372.","journal-title":"J Risk Res"},{"key":"2467_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"74","DOI":"10.1080\/02646830801918455","volume":"26","author":"O White","year":"2008","unstructured":"White O, McCorry NK, Scott-Heyes G, Dempster M, Manderson J. Maternal appraisals of risk, coping and prenatal attachment among women hospitalised with pregnancy complications. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2008;26:74\u201385.","journal-title":"J Reprod Infant Psychol"},{"key":"2467_CR3","first-page":"54","volume":"115","author":"PA Cook","year":"2001","unstructured":"Cook PA, Bellis MA. Knowing the risk: relationships between risk behaviour and health knowledge. Public Health. 2001;115:54\u201361.","journal-title":"Public Health"},{"key":"2467_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"827","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.324.7341.827","volume":"324","author":"A Edwards","year":"2002","unstructured":"Edwards A, Elwyn G, Mulley M. Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. BMJ Brit Med J. 2002;324:827\u201330.","journal-title":"BMJ Brit Med J"},{"key":"2467_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"728","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.327.7417.728","volume":"327","author":"A Alaszewski","year":"2003","unstructured":"Alaszewski A, Horlick-Jones T. How can doctors communicate information about risk more effectively? BMJ Brit Med J. 2003;327:728\u201331.","journal-title":"BMJ Brit Med J"},{"key":"2467_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"68","DOI":"10.1080\/13698575.2013.863852","volume":"16","author":"R Chadwick","year":"2014","unstructured":"Chadwick R, Foster D. Negotiating risky bodies: childbirth and constructions of risk. Health Risk Soc. 2014;16:68\u201383.","journal-title":"Health Risk Soc"},{"key":"2467_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"490","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2458-9-490","volume":"9","author":"JJ Petersen","year":"2009","unstructured":"Petersen JJ, Paulitsch MA, Guethlin C, Genischen J, Jahn A. A survey on worries of pregnant women--testing the German version of the Cambridge worry scale. BMC Public Health. 2009;9:490. \n                    https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2458-9-490\n                    \n                  .","journal-title":"BMC Public Health"},{"key":"2467_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"892","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.324.7342.892","volume":"324","author":"R Johanson","year":"2002","unstructured":"Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far? BMJ Brit Med J. 2002;324:892\u20135.","journal-title":"BMJ Brit Med J"},{"key":"2467_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"51","DOI":"10.1080\/13698575.2013.859231","volume":"16","author":"K Coxon","year":"2014","unstructured":"Coxon K, Sandall J, Fulop N. To what extent are women free to choose where to give birth? How discourses of risk, blame and responsibility influence birth place decisions. Health Risk Soc. 2014;16:51\u201367.","journal-title":"Health Risk Soc"},{"key":"2467_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1388","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2004.00338.x","volume":"111","author":"B Reime","year":"2004","unstructured":"Reime B, Klein MC, Kelly A, Duxbury N, Saxell L, Liston R, Prompers FJ, Entjes RS, Wong V. Do maternity care provider groups have different attitudes towards birth? BJOG Int J Obstet Gy. 2004;111:1388\u201393.","journal-title":"BJOG Int J Obstet Gy"},{"key":"2467_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"129","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1523-536X.2008.00226.x","volume":"35","author":"F Monari","year":"2008","unstructured":"Monari F, Di Mario S, Facchinetti F, Basevi V. Obstetricians\u2019 and midwives\u2019 attitudes toward caesarean section. Birth. 2008;35:129\u201335.","journal-title":"Birth."},{"key":"2467_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"270","DOI":"10.1016\/j.wsif.2008.05.010","volume":"31","author":"D Cherniak","year":"2008","unstructured":"Cherniak D, Fisher J. Explaining obstetric interventionism: technical skills, common conceptualisations, or collective countertransference? Women Stud Int Forum. 2008;31:270\u20137.","journal-title":"Women Stud Int Forum"},{"key":"2467_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"122","DOI":"10.1186\/1472-6947-12-122","volume":"12","author":"H Cheyne","year":"2012","unstructured":"Cheyne H, Dalgleish L, Tucker J, Kane F, Shetty A, McLeod S, Niven C. Risk assessment and decision making about in-labour transfer from rural maternity care: a social judgement and signal detection analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis. 2012;12:122. \n                    https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1472-6947-12-122\n                    \n                  .","journal-title":"BMC Med Inform Decis"},{"key":"2467_CR14","first-page":"23","volume":"27","author":"K Austin","year":"2017","unstructured":"Austin K. Constructions of risk and the maternal body: implications for midwifery practice. Midirs Midwifery Digest. 2017;27:23\u20136.","journal-title":"Midirs Midwifery Digest"},{"key":"2467_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"250","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmwh.2010.01.004","volume":"55","author":"S Downe","year":"2010","unstructured":"Downe S, Finlayson K, Fleming A. Creating a collaborative culture in maternity care. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010;55:250\u20134.","journal-title":"J Midwifery Womens Health"},{"key":"2467_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"26","DOI":"10.1016\/S1445-4386(02)70013-X","volume":"15","author":"K Lane","year":"2002","unstructured":"Lane K. Midwifery: a profession in transition. Aust J Midwifery. 2002;15:26\u201331.","journal-title":"Aust J Midwifery"},{"key":"2467_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"141","DOI":"10.1525\/maq.1996.10.2.02a00030","volume":"10","author":"C Browner","year":"1996","unstructured":"Browner C, Press N. The production of authoritative knowledge in American prenatal care. Med Anthropol Q. 1996;10:141\u201356.","journal-title":"Med Anthropol Q"},{"key":"2467_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"486","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1467-9566.2009.01207.x","volume":"32","author":"D Walsh","year":"2009","unstructured":"Walsh D. Childbirth embodiment: problematic aspects of current understandings. Sociol Health Illn. 2009;32:486\u2013501.","journal-title":"Sociol Health Illn"},{"key":"2467_CR19","volume-title":"Risk","author":"D Lupton","year":"1999","unstructured":"Lupton D. Risk. Abingdon: Routledge; 1999."},{"key":"2467_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"511","DOI":"10.1080\/13698575.2012.701277","volume":"14","author":"S Lee","year":"2012","unstructured":"Lee S, Ayers S, Holden D. Risk perception of women during high risk pregnancy: a systematic review. Health Risk Soc. 2012;14:511\u201331.","journal-title":"Health Risk Soc"},{"key":"2467_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"403","DOI":"10.1016\/j.midw.2013.04.010","volume":"30","author":"S Lee","year":"2014","unstructured":"Lee S, Ayers S, Holden D. A metasynthesis of risk perception of women with high risk pregnancies. Midwifery. 2014;30:403\u201311.","journal-title":"Midwifery."},{"key":"2467_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"216","DOI":"10.1177\/0193945905282305","volume":"28","author":"BA Gray","year":"2006","unstructured":"Gray BA. Hospitalization history and differences in self-rated pregnancy risk. West J Nurs Res. 2006;28:216\u201329.","journal-title":"West J Nurs Res"},{"key":"2467_CR23","volume-title":"IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 22.0","author":"IBM Corp","year":"2013","unstructured":"IBM Corp. IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 22.0. Armonk: IBM Corp; 2013."},{"key":"2467_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"101","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1523-536X.2002.00170.x","volume":"29","author":"HL Melender","year":"2002","unstructured":"Melender HL. Experiences and fears associated with pregnancy and childbirth: a study of 329 pregnant women. Birth. 2002;29:101\u201311.","journal-title":"Birth."},{"key":"2467_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1016\/S0266-6138(99)90062-1","volume":"15","author":"HL Melender","year":"1999","unstructured":"Melender HL, Lauri S. Fears associated with pregnancy and childbirth \u2013 experiences of women who have recently given birth. Midwifery. 1999;15:177\u201382.","journal-title":"Midwifery."},{"key":"2467_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"49","DOI":"10.1016\/j.midw.2016.03.008","volume":"38","author":"S Lee","year":"2016","unstructured":"Lee S, Ayers S, Holden D. Risk perception and choice of place of birth in women with high risk pregnancies: a qualitative study. Midwifery. 2016;38:49\u201354.","journal-title":"Midwifery."},{"key":"2467_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1494","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2008.01892.x","volume":"115","author":"CE Turner","year":"2008","unstructured":"Turner CE, Young JM, Solomon MJ, Ludlow J, Benness C, Phipps H. Vaginal delivery compared with elective caesarean section: the views of pregnant women and clinicians. BJOG Int J Obstet Gy. 2008;115:1494\u2013502.","journal-title":"BJOG Int J Obstet Gy"},{"key":"2467_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"987","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1467-9566.2011.01366.x","volume":"33","author":"M Scamell","year":"2011","unstructured":"Scamell M. The swan effect in midwifery talk and practice: a tension between normality and the language of risk. Sociol Health Illn. 2011;33:987\u20131001.","journal-title":"Sociol Health Illn"},{"key":"2467_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"207","DOI":"10.1080\/13698575.2012.661041","volume":"14","author":"M Scamell","year":"2012","unstructured":"Scamell M, Alaszewski A. Fateful moments and the categorisation of risk; midwifery practice and the ever-narrowing window of normality during childbirth. Health Risk Soc. 2012;14:207\u201321.","journal-title":"Health Risk Soc"},{"key":"2467_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"107","DOI":"10.1080\/13698570500108677","volume":"7","author":"KJ Thirlaway","year":"2005","unstructured":"Thirlaway KJ, Heggs DA. Interpreting risk messages: Women\u2019s responses to a health story. Health Risk Soc. 2005;7:107\u201321.","journal-title":"Health Risk Soc"},{"key":"2467_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"41","DOI":"10.1016\/0001-6918(89)90050-4","volume":"72","author":"L Hendrickx","year":"1989","unstructured":"Hendrickx L, Vlek C, Oppewal H. Relative importance of scenario information and frequency information in the judgement of risk. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1989;72:41\u201363.","journal-title":"Acta Psychol (Amst)"},{"key":"2467_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"185","DOI":"10.1080\/1369857031000123957","volume":"5","author":"F Wood","year":"2003","unstructured":"Wood F, Prior L, Gray J. Translations of risk: decision making in a cancer genetics service. Health Risk Soc. 2003;5:185\u201398.","journal-title":"Health Risk Soc"},{"key":"2467_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"107","DOI":"10.1016\/j.wombi.2015.08.010","volume":"29","author":"S Healy","year":"2016","unstructured":"Healy S, Humphreys E, Kennedy C. Midwives\u2019 and obstetricians\u2019 perceptions of risk and its impact on clinical practice and decision-making in labour: an integrative review. Women Birth. 2016;29:107\u201316.","journal-title":"Women Birth"},{"key":"2467_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1386\/cjcs.2.2.177_1","volume":"2","author":"O Renn","year":"2010","unstructured":"Renn O. The contribution of different types of knowledge towards understanding, sharing and communication risk concepts. Catalan J Comm Cult Stud. 2010;2:177\u201395.","journal-title":"Catalan J Comm Cult Stud"},{"key":"2467_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"367","DOI":"10.1016\/j.wombi.2017.02.005","volume":"30","author":"S Healy","year":"2017","unstructured":"Healy S, Humphreys E, Kennedy C. A qualitative exploration of how midwives\u2019 and obstetricians\u2019 perception of risk affects care practices for low-risk women and normal birth. Women Birth. 2017;30:367\u201375.","journal-title":"Women Birth"},{"key":"2467_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"489","DOI":"10.1016\/j.midw.2011.07.004","volume":"28","author":"AM Howarth","year":"2012","unstructured":"Howarth AM, Swain NR, Treharne GJ. First-time mothers\u2019 perspectives on relationships with and between midwives and doctors: insights from a qualitative study of giving birth in New Zealand. Midwifery. 2012;28:489\u201394.","journal-title":"Midwifery."},{"key":"2467_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"737","DOI":"10.1037\/0033-2909.125.6.737","volume":"125","author":"R Nickerson","year":"1999","unstructured":"Nickerson R. How we know \u2013 and sometimes misjudge \u2013 what others know: imputing one\u2019s own knowledge to others. Psychol Bull. 1999;125:737\u201359.","journal-title":"Psychol Bull"},{"key":"2467_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1177","DOI":"10.1126\/science.1154199","volume":"320","author":"E Pronin","year":"2008","unstructured":"Pronin E. How we see ourselves and how we see others. Science. 2008;320:1177\u201380.","journal-title":"Science."},{"key":"2467_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"575","DOI":"10.1177\/1049732311424292","volume":"22","author":"WA Hall","year":"2012","unstructured":"Hall WA, Tomkinson J, Klein MC. Canadian care providers and pregnant women\u2019s approaches to managing birth: minimizing risk while maximizing integrity. Qual Health Res. 2012;22:575\u201386.","journal-title":"Qual Health Res"},{"key":"2467_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"299","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jpsychores.2013.08.004","volume":"75","author":"D Cannella","year":"2013","unstructured":"Cannella D, Auerbach A, Lobel M. Predicting birth outcomes: together, mother and health care provider know best. J Psychosom Res. 2013;75:299\u2013304.","journal-title":"J Psychosom Res"}],"container-title":["BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12884-019-2467-4.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12884-019-2467-4\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12884-019-2467-4.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,9,25]],"date-time":"2020-09-25T19:04:49Z","timestamp":1601060689000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12884-019-2467-4"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2019,9,27]]},"references-count":40,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2019,12]]}},"alternative-id":["2467"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12884-019-2467-4","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-2393"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2393","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2019,9,27]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2 January 2019","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"20 August 2019","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"27 September 2019","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"Ethics permission was obtained on 11th April 2016 from the National Health Service Research Ethics Committee: North of Scotland committee. Reference number: 16\/NS\/0027. This was the committee allocated centrally via the NHS ethics process. NHS ethics committees work to standard guidelines and have jurisdiction across the United Kingdom. Participants were aware their consent to participate in the study was considered indicated by completion of the questionnaire. This was agreed as part of the ethics approval.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no competing interests.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"335"}}