Objective: To outline the importance of the clarity of data analysis in the doing and reporting of interview-based qualitative research. Approach:We explore the clear links between data analysis and evidence.We argue that transparency in the data analysis process is integral to determining the evidence that is generated. Data analysis must occur concurrently with data collection and comprises an ongoing process of 'testing the fit' between the data collected and analysis. We discuss four steps in the process of thematic data analysis: immersion, coding, categorising and generation of themes. Conclusion: Rigorous and systematicanalysis of qualitative data is integral to the production of high-quality research.Studies that give an explicit account of the data analysis process provide insights into how conclusions are reached while studies that explain themes anchored to data and theory produce the strongest evidence.

No abstract

BackgroundUnderstanding immigrant women’s experiences of maternity care is critical if receiving country care systems are to respond appropriately to increasing global migration. This systematic review aimed to compare what we know about immigrant and non-immigrant women’s experiences of maternity care.MethodsMedline, CINAHL, Health Star, Embase and PsychInfo were searched for the period 1989–2012. First, we retrieved population-based studies of women’s experiences of maternity care (n = 12). For countries with identified population studies, studies focused specifically on immigrant women’s experiences of care were also retrieved (n = 22). For all included studies, we extracted available data on experiences of care and undertook a descriptive comparison.ResultsWhat immigrant and non-immigrant women want from maternity care proved similar: safe, high quality, attentive and individualised care, with adequate information and support. Immigrant women were less positive about their care than non-immigrant women. Communication problems and lack of familiarity with care systems impacted negatively on immigrant women’s experiences, as did perceptions of discrimination and care which was not kind or respectful.ConclusionFew differences were found in what immigrant and non-immigrant women want from maternity care. The challenge for health systems is to address the barriers immigrant women face by improving communication, increasing women’s understanding of care provision and reducing discrimination.

Mortality risk among babies born to migrants is not consistently higher, but appears to be greatest among refugees, non-European migrants to Europe, and foreign-born blacks in the US. To understand this variation better, more information is needed about migrant background, such as length of time in receiving country and receiving country language fluency. Additional data on demographic, health care, biological, medical, and socioeconomic risk factors should be gathered and analyzed in greater detail.

Objective This study aimed to investigate pregnancy outcomes in Somali-born women compared with those women born in each of the six receiving countries: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Finland, Norway and Sweden.Design Meta-analyses of routinely collected data on confinements and births.Setting National or regional perinatal datasets spanning 3-6 years between 1997 and 2004 from six countries.Sample A total of 10 431 Somali-born women and 2 168 891 receiving country-born women.Methods Meta-analyses to compare outcomes for Somali-born and receiving country-born women across the six countries.Main outcome measures Events of labour (induction, epidural use and proportion of women using no analgesia), mode of birth (spontaneous vaginal birth, operative vaginal birth and caesarean section) and infant outcomes (preterm birth, birthweight, Apgar at 5 minutes, stillbirths and neonatal deaths).Results Compared with receiving country-born women, Somaliborn women were less likely to give birth preterm (pooled OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.81) or to have infants of low birthweight (pooled OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.98), but there was an excess of caesarean sections, particularly in first births (pooled OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25-1.59) and an excess of stillbirths (pooled OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.38-2.51).Conclusions This analysis has identified a number of disparities in outcomes between Somali-born women and their receiving country counterparts. The disparities are not readily explained and they raise concerns about the provision of maternity care for Somali women postmigration. Review of maternity care practices followed by implementation and careful evaluation of strategies to improve both care and outcomes for Somali women is needed.