IntroductionEarly childhood development is key to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and can be negatively influenced by many different adversities including violence in the home, neglect, abuse and parental ill-health. We set out to quantify the extent to which multiple adversities are associated with impaired early childhood growth & development.MethodsThis was a substudy of the SPRING cluster randomised controlled trial covering the whole population of 120 villages of rural India. We assessed all children born from 18 June 2015 for adversities in the first year of life and summed these to make a total cumulative adversity score, and four subscale scores. We assessed the association of each of these with weight-for-age z-score, length-for-age z-score, and the motor, cognitive and language developmental scales of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development III assessed at 18 months.ResultsWe enrolled 1726 children soon after birth and assessed 1273 of these at both 12 and 18 months of age. There were consistent and strongly negative relationships between all measures of childhood adversity and all five child growth & development outcome measures at 18 months of age. For the Bayley motor scale, each additional adversity was associated with a 1.1 point decrease (95%CI -1.3, -0.9); for the cognitive scales this was 0.8 points (95%CI -1.0, -0.6); and for language this was 1.4 points (95%CI -1.9, -1.1). Similarly for growth, each additional adversity was associated with a -0.09 change in weight-for-age z-score (-0.11, -0.06) and -0.12 change in height-for-age z-score (-0.14, -0.09).DiscussionOur results are the first from a large population-based study in a low/middle-income country to show that each increase in adversity in multiple domains increases risk to child growth and development at a very early age. There is an urgent need to act to improve these outcomes for young children in LMICs and these findings suggest that Early Childhood programmes should prioritise early childhood adversity because of its impact on developmental inequities from the very start.

IntroductionIn 2014, 2 freestanding, midwifery‐led birth centers opened in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to qualitatively investigate the integration of the birth centers into the local, preexisting intrapartum systems from the perspective of health care providers and managerial staff.MethodsFocus groups or interviews were conducted with health care providers (paramedics, midwives, nurses, physicians) and managerial staff who had experienced urgent and/or nonurgent maternal or newborn transports from a birth center to one of 4 hospitals in Ottawa or Toronto. A descriptive qualitative approach to data analysis was undertaken.ResultsTwenty‐four health care providers and managerial staff participated in a focus group or interview. Participants described positive experiences transporting women and/or newborns from the birth centers to hospitals; these positive experiences were attributed to the collaborative planning, training, and communication that occurred prior to opening the birth centers. The degree of integration was dependent on hospital‐specific characteristics such as history, culture, and the presence or absence of midwifery privileging. Participants described the need for only minor improvements to administrative processes as well as the challenge of keeping large numbers of staff updated with respect to urgent transport policies. Planning and opening of the birth centers was seen as a driving force in further integrating midwifery care and improving interprofessional practice.DiscussionThe collaborative approach for the planning and implementation of the birth centers was a key factor in the successful integration into the existing maternal‐newborn system and contributed to improving integrated professional practice among midwives, paramedics, nurses, and physicians. This approach may be used as a template for the integration of other new independent health care facilities and programs into the existing health care system.

A key barrier to epidemiological research on child behaviour problems in developing countries is the lack of culturally relevant, internationally recognized psychometric instruments. This paper proposes a model for the qualitative adaptation of psychometric instruments in developing-country settings and presents a case study of the adaptation of 3 internationally recognized instruments in Pakistan: the Child Behavior Checklist, the Youth Self-Report and the Teacher's Report Form. This model encompassed a systematic procedure with 6 distinct phases to minimize bias and ensure equivalence with the original instruments: selection, deliberation, alteration, feasibility, testing and formal approval. The process was conducted in collaboration with the instruments' developer. A multidisciplinary working group of experts identified equivalence issues and suggested modifications. Focus group discussions with informants highlighted comprehension issues. Subsequently modified instruments were thoroughly tested. Finally, the instruments' developer approval further validated the qualitative adaptation. The study proposes a rigorous and systematic model to effectively achieve cultural adaptation of psychometric instruments. 1Department of Psychology, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan (Correspondence to B. Khan: bushra.khan@ymail.com

IntroductionIn 2014, Ontario opened 2 stand‐alone midwifery‐led birth centers. Using mixed methods, we evaluated the first year of operations for quality and safety, client experience, and integration into the maternity care community. This article reports on our study of safety and quality of care.MethodsThis descriptive evaluation focused on women admitted to a birth center at the beginning of labor. For context, we matched this cohort (on a 1:4 basis) with similar low‐risk midwifery clients giving birth in a hospital. Data sources included Ontario's Better Outcomes Registry and Network (BORN) Information System, the Canadian Institute for Health Information, Ontario census data, and birth center records.ResultsOf 495 women admitted to a birth center, 87.9% experienced a spontaneous vaginal birth, regardless of the eventual location of birth, and 7.7% had a cesarean birth. The transport rate to a hospital was 26.3%. When compared with midwifery clients with a planned hospital birth, rates of intervention (epidural analgesia, labor augmentation, assisted vaginal birth, and cesarean birth) were significantly lower in the planned birth center group, even when controlled for previous cesarean birth and body mass index. Markers of potential morbidity were identified in about 10% of birth center births; however, there were no short‐term health impacts up to discharge from midwifery care at 6 weeks postpartum. Care was low in intervention and safe (minimal negative outcomes and transport rates comparable to the literature).DiscussionIn the first year of operation, care was consistent with national guidelines, and morbidity and mortality rates and intervention rates were low for women with low‐risk pregnancies seeking a low‐intervention approach for labor and birth. Further evaluation to confirm these findings is required as the number of births grows.

Mistreatment with women during childbirth is prevalent in many in low- and middle-income countries. There is dearth of evidence that informs development of health system interventions to promote supportive and respectful maternity care in facility-based settings. We examined health systems bottlenecks that impedes provision of supportive and respectful maternity care in secondary-level public healthcare system of Pakistan. Using a qualitative exploratory design, forty in-depth interviews conducted with maternity care staff of six public health facilities in southern Pakistan. Development of interview guide and data analyses were guided by the WHO’s six health system building blocks. A combination of inductive and deductive approach was used for data analyses. Our study identified range of bottlenecks impeding provision of RMC. In terms of leadership/governance, there was lack of institutional guidelines, supervision and monitoring, and patient feedback mechanism. No systematic mechanism existed to screen and record patient psychosocial needs. Health workforce lacked training opportunities on RMC that resulted in limited knowledge and skills; there were also concerns about lack of recognition from leadership for good performers, and poor relationship and coordination between clinical and non-clinical staff. Regarding the domain of service delivery, we found that patients were perceived as un-cooperative, non-RMC manifestations were acceptable and normalized under certain conditions, and restrictive policies for active engagement of companions. Finally, lack of cleanliness, curtains for privacy, seating arrangement for companion were the identified issues infrastructural issues. A service-delivery intervention package is needed that effectively uses all six components of the health system: from investments in capacity building of maternity teams to creating a conducive facility environment via proper governance and accountability mechanisms. Such interventions should not only focus on provision of maternity care in a respectful and dignified manner, but also ensure that care is responsive to the psychosocial needs of pregnant women without any discrimination.