IntroductionThere are growing concerns about the increase in rates of commonly used childbirth interventions. When indicated, childbirth interventions are crucial for preventing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, but their routine use in healthy women and children leads to avoidable maternal and neonatal harm. Establishing ideal rates of interventions can be challenging. This study aims to describe the range of variations in the use of commonly used childbirth interventions in high-income countries around the world, and in outcomes in nulliparous and multiparous women.Methods and analysisThis multinational cross-sectional study will use data from births in 2013 with national population data or representative samples of the population of pregnant women in high-income countries. Data from women who gave birth to a single child from 37 weeks gestation onwards will be included and the results will be presented for nulliparous and multiparous women separately. Anonymised individual level data will be analysed. Primary outcomes are rates of commonly used childbirth interventions, including induction and/or augmentation of labour, intrapartum antibiotics, epidural and pharmacological pain relief, episiotomy in vaginal births, instrument-assisted birth (vacuum or forceps), caesarean section and use of oxytocin postpartum. Secondary outcomes are maternal and perinatal mortality, Apgar score below 7 at 5 min, postpartum haemorrhage and obstetric anal sphincter injury. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses will be conducted to investigate variations among countries, adjusted for maternal age, body mass index, gestational weight gain, ethnic background, socioeconomic status and infant birth weight. The overall mean rates will be considered as a reference category, weighted for the size of the study population per country.Ethics and disseminationThe Medical Ethics Review Committee of VU University Medical Center Amsterdam confirmed that an official approval of this study was not required. Results will be disseminated at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Introduction: fear is one of the main factors associated with psychopathological disor-ders evidenced in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: translate and validate Fear of COVID–19 Scale (FCV-19S) into Portuguese Brazilian version, named Covid-19 Fear Scale (EMC-19). Methods: cross-sectional study with 364 individuals recruited through social networks, considering as inclusion criteria: being over 18 years old and fluent in Portuguese. After participant consentment an electronic form was completed, which included the prelimi-nary Portuguese version and EMC-19, in addition to sociodemographic variables. Data processing was performed using the SPSS 26 version. For parametric measures, Pear-son’s coefficient and Student’s T were used, and for non-parametric measures the U of Mann Whitney. The magnitude of the correlation coefficients was classified according to Cohen’s criteria and the confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS 26.0. For internal con-sistency, Cronbach’s alpha. Results: mean age of 33.11 years (±10,047), most of them female (n=332; 91,2%), with higher education (n=286; 78,6%), married (n=225, 61,8 %) and with children (n=300, 82,4%). Exploratory factorial analysis/EFA and confirmatory factor analysis/CFA made. Only one component emerged from the CFA, with an explained variance of 55,49%, re-sulting in a one-dimensional model with satisfactory adjustment indexes (X2/gl=2,135; RMSEA=0,061; CFI, TLI, GFI<0,095). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is 876. Conclusions: the construct validity of the one-dimensional structure of the EMC-19 was demonstrated, as well as its good internal consistency.

Background Longitudinal cohort studies gather large amounts of data over time, often without direct benefit to participants. A positive experience may encourage retention in the study, and participants may benefit in unanticipated ways. Objective To explore first‐time mothers’ experiences of taking part in a longitudinal cohort study and completing self‐administered surveys during pregnancy and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months’ postpartum. Design Content analysis of comments written by participants in the Maternal health And Maternal Morbidity in Ireland study's five self‐completion surveys, a multisite cohort study exploring women's health and health problems during and after pregnancy. This paper focuses on what women wrote about taking part in the research. Ethical approval was granted by the site hospitals and university. Setting and participants A total of 2174 women were recruited from two maternity hospitals in Ireland between 2012 and 2015. Findings A total of 1000 comments were made in the five surveys. Antenatally, barriers related to surveys being long and questions being intimate. Postpartum, barriers related to being busy with life as first‐time mothers. Benefits gained included gaining access to information, taking time to reflect, stopping to think and being prompted to seek help. Survey questions alone were described as valuable sources of information. Discussion and conclusions Findings suggest that survey research can “give back” to women by being a source of information and a trigger to seek professional help, even while asking sensitive questions. Understanding this can help researchers construct surveys to maximize benefits, real and potential, for participants.

IntroductionThe PDSS-24 is a Portuguese short version of the Postpartum Depression Screening Scale (Beck and Gable, 2002). Items were selected on the basis of exploratory factor analysis (those with loadings >.60). The PDSS-24 proved to be superior to the 35-items PDSS in reliability, validity and screening ability (Pereira et al. 2013).ObjectivesTo analyze the psychometric properties (construct validity using Confirmatory Factor Analysis, discriminant validity and reliability) of the Brazilian preliminary version of PDSS-24MethodsAfter confirming the items semantic equivalence and slightly adapt two adjectives from European to Brazilian Portuguese, 350 pregnant women (Mean age: 30.01±5.452; Mean gestation weeks=25.17±6.55), with uncomplicated pregnancies, completed the PDSS-24 and the Brazilian recently validated versions of Profile of Mood States-25 (PoMS; Barros et al. 2021). SPSS and AMOS software were used.ResultsAfter some errors were correlated the multidimensional second-order model of PDSS-24 presented an aceptable fit (χ2=3.448; RMSEA=.099; CFI=.817, TLI=.886, GFI=.886). The PDSS Cronbach’s alpha for the total was α=.90. Cronbach alpha was .90 for the total and >.75 for the dimensions. Appling the Portuguese validated cut-off score for Major Depression/DSM-5 (>42) to this sample 224 (64.0%) participants presented clinical relevant depressive symptoms.ConclusionsThe Brazilian PDSS-24 has acceptable validity and reliability. The percentage of women with high depressive symptomatology is three times higher than the figures reported in Portuguese Studies. This can be partly explained by the fact that data collection was done during the COVID19 pandemic. It is important to determine the PDSS cut-offs to screen for perinatal depression in Brazil.