Table 1 Summary characteristics of included studies
Reference | Aim | Year study conducted | Description of participants | Description of setting | Data collection method | Data analysis method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Akselsson 2017 [28] | To explore women’s attitudes, experiences and compliance concerning the practice of Mindfetalness in late pregnancy | 15 Feb −7 Jul 2016 | 104 women, 17–42 years of age, 28–32 weeks of pregnancy | Three maternity clinics in Stockholm, Sweden | Midwife administered questionnaire | Qualitative manifest content analysis |
To explore normal fetal activity in the third trimester as perceived by pregnant women themselves | Not stated | 19 low-risk nulliparous women, 19–34 years and ≥ 28 week’s gestation | Five community-based midwifery practices in a provincial city in the North Island of New Zealand | Interviews conducted in the third trimester at two time-points; 28–32 weeks and 37–41 weeks | Qualitative content analysis | |
Draper 1986 [31] | To report on the views of women on filling in fetal movement charts during pregnancy | 1982 and 1983 | 132 women, 27–37 weeks gestation | Community antenatal clinic in Cambridge | Interviews and postal questionnaire | Not stated |
To examine how women, who consulted health care due to RFM, describe how the baby had moved less or differently, and to explore why women decide to consult health care due to RFM and investigate reasons for delaying a consultation | Jan-Dec 2014 | 960 women of median age 32 years and ≥ 28 week’s gestation | Seven delivery wards in Stockholm, Sweden | Questionnaire with open-ended response options | Modified content analysis | |
McArdle 2015 [34] | To investigate sources pregnant women used to acquire information about FMs and their preferences for receiving this information | Dec 2011-Mar 2012 | 526 women of mean age 30.5 years and ≥ 32 week’s gestation | Antenatal clinic of a large metropolitan maternity hospital, Australia | Questionnaire with open-ended questions | Content analysis |
Pollock 2020 [35] | To explore the ANC experiences of Australian mothers who had recently had a live birth to determine their knowledge of FMs | May-Oct 2017. | 391 women, > 18 years of age who had given birth to a live baby within the last ten years | Australia | Online survey with open ended questions | Summative content analysis |
Rådestad & Lindgren 2012 [36] | To explore women’s perceptions of FMs in full-term pregnancy | 2011 | 40 women, 23–40 years old, between 37 + 2 and 41 + 5 week’s gestation | One antenatal clinic in the capital of Sweden | Interviews | Thematic analysis |
Raynes-Greenow, 2013 [37] | To examine maternal perception of normal FMs, and to describe FM advice in a routine antenatal care setting | Not stated | 156 women ≥28 weeks gestation of mean age 32 years | A major metropolitan tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia | Self-administered questionnaire with open-ended questions | Thematic analysis |
Smyth 2016 [38] | To explore what triggers women to access health care after experiencing RFM and conversely what stops them | Aug 2012-Feb 2013 | 21 women of mean age 27 years, and gestation at time of RFM 32 weeks | Large teaching hospital in the North-West of England | Semi-structured interviews | Framework analysis |