To the Editor: The analysis of publicly funded home births in Australia by Catling-Paull and colleagues1 contains some significant gaps that require clarification. Without accurate information, women may not be fully informed about their childbirth choices.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Catling-Paull C, Coddington RL, Foureur MJ, Homer CSE; the Birthplace in Australia Study and the National Publicly-funded Homebirth. Publicly funded homebirth in Australia: a review of maternal and neonatal outcomes over 6 years. Med J Aust 2013; 198: 616-620. <MJA full text>
- 2. Chan A, Scheil W, Scott J, et al. Pregnancy outcome in South Australia 2009. Adelaide: Pregnancy Outcome Unit, SA Health, Government of South Australia, 2011.
- 3. Birthplace in England Collaborative Group, Brocklehurst P, Hardy P, Hollowell J, et al. Perinatal and maternal outcomes by planned place of birth for healthy women with low risk pregnancies: the Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study. BMJ 2011; 343: d7400.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.
No relevant disclosures.