. 2022 Jun 20;12(6):e058155. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058155

Table 1.

English articles included in the review

Outcomes	Reference	Study design	Intervention	Effect of intervention	Comments
Communication within the household	Elbourne et al⁴¹ UK	RCT	Maternity case notes	No impact	No significant difference was observed between mothers in the case note group and cooperation card group concerning the involvement of the baby’s father. The no of events not reported.
	Phipps⁴⁰ Australia	Qualitative	Women-held maternity records	Positive	Women had the opportunity to share what they were experiencing during their pregnancy with their husbands/partners, grandparents, and friends.
	Hagiwara et al³⁸ Palestine	Quasi-experimental	MCH handbook	Positive	Women experienced more partner involvement during pregnancy, delivery, and child care and reduced misconceptions about pregnancy and child care among family members.
	Osaki et al³⁹ Indonesia	Cluster RCT	MCH handbook	Positive	Mothers in the intervention arm reported that their husbands showed their support in saving money for delivery (OR=1.82, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.76), keeping their baby warm (OR=1.58, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.46), and giving their infant/child developmental stimulation (OR=1.62, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.48).
Communication between mothers/ caregivers and healthcare providers	Elbourne et al⁴¹ UK	RCT	Maternity case notes	Positive	Women holding their full records were significantly more likely to feel it was easier to talk to doctors and midwives (RR (rate ratio)=1.73, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.59) and in control of their antenatal care (RR=1.45, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.95) than cooperation card holders.
	Young et al⁴² USA	Qualitative	Family-carried growth record	Positive	Parents receiving the records appeared more attentive and receptive to nutrition counselling. They also asked more questions and volunteered more pertinent information about their children. The number of events not reported.
	Shah et al³³ Multicountries	Quasi-experimental	Home-based maternal record (HBMR)	Positive	Healthcare providers’ training and involvement from the start of the HBMR scheme promoted maternal, newborn and child health among pregnant women and mothers.
	Harrison et al⁴³ South Africa	Descriptive prospective study	Road-to-Health (RTH) card	Mixed	Most mothers (74%) in public clinics received some explanation of the card. The sections discussed were weight (58%), immunisation schedules (26%), sensory tests (5%), and developmental milestones (5%). In private clinics, relatively few mothers (31%) received an explanation of the RTH card, and the weight chart interpretation tended to be ignored (92%).
	Moore et al³⁷ UK	Quasi-experimental	Personal child health record (PCHR)	No impact	Half of the responses included a comment about a perceived lack of communication or the failure of professionals to respond to messages.
	Phipps⁴⁰ Australia	Qualitative	Women-held maternity records	Positive	Women believed that carrying their records encouraged the healthcare workers to explain better what was being recorded and why certain things were done. They were aware the women would go home and reread the records.
	Bjerkeli Grøvdal et al⁴⁴ Norway	RCT	Parent-held child health record	No impact	No significant difference in the difficulty parents felt when talking to professionals (nurse, p=0.66; doctor, p=0.78; other doctors, p=0.39, and other health personnel, p=0.60) between parent-held child health record and control groups.
	Grippo & Fracolli⁴⁵ Brazil	Mixed methods	Educational booklet	Positive	The booklet served as a strengthening element in the relationship between family caregivers and the healthcare providers. Frequency of contact is more common with community health agents, followed by nurses.
	Walton & Bedford⁴⁶ UK	Cross-sectional	PCHR	Mixed	Some parents (22%) were not given a satisfactory explanation of using the PCHR when issued to them. Health visitors were more likely to use the PCHR to obtain and record child information than other healthcare providers.
	Clendon & Dignam⁴⁷ New Zealand	Qualitative	Child health and development record book	Positive	As a clinical tool, the record book helped nurses to guide interventions and track mothers’ progress. It is also a valuable tool for mothers to facilitate building a relationship with their nurses.
	Hamilton & Wyver⁴⁸ Australia	Mixed methods	Child personal health record (CPHR)	Mixed	Parent’s lack of engagement with the CPHR could be attributed to healthcare providers’ lack of involvement. However, the CPHR empowered parents to communicate their perceptions about their children’s health.
	Hagiwara et al³⁸ Palestine	Quasi-experimental	MCH handbook	Positive	The MCH handbook may be an effective communication tool between healthcare providers and women with low and high education during their first pregnancy (p<0.05).
	Engida & Simireta⁴⁹ Ethiopia	Qualitative	Speaking books	Positive	The speaking book allowed mothers to ask questions and receive additional information during book sessions with the health development army (eg, solutions to infants’ throat and tooth problems).
	Whitford et al⁵⁰ Scotland	Qualitative	Birth plan within woman-held maternity records	Mixed	The birth plan provided an opportunity to stimulate discussions and enhance communication between pregnant women and healthcare providers. However, not all women experienced the benefits, and staff noted some challenges.
	Lee et al⁵¹ USA	Qualitative	Patient passport	Positive	The passport enriched the overall communication between families and healthcare providers. They could take and refer to the passport book for their child’s recent hospitalisation even after discharge.
	McKinn et al³⁴ Vietnam	Qualitative	MCH handbook	No impact	Ethnic minority women received didactic, one-way style communication and not context-adjusted information from healthcare providers. Providers relied on written information (MCH handbook) in place of interpersonal communication.
Satisfaction with the information provided by the home-based records	Shah et al³³ Multi-countries	Quasi-experimental	HBMR	Positive	HBMR provided useful information on maternal, newborn and child health. Mothers kept the cards until the end of the evaluation period. The mean record retention in all centres was about 80%.
	Jeffs et al⁵⁵ Australia	Quasi-experimental	Personal health record (PHR)	Positive	The most helpful sections of the PHR were records of immunisation (36%), developmental milestones (29%), and progress notes (16%).
	McMaster Bosnia et al⁵⁶	Cross-sectional	PCHR and advice booklet	Positive	Both parents and older children appreciated the health information content of the booklet. Nearly all had read the booklet, reflecting the lack of other reading materials.
	Harrison et al⁴³ South Africa	Descriptive prospective study	RTH card	Mixed	Most mothers carried the card, but this number dropped for hospital visits and consultations with private doctors. Mothers hardly understood the weight-for-age chart, immunisation schedule, and milestone section.
	Hampshire et al⁵⁷ UK	Cross-sectional	PCHR	Positive	Most of the mothers (82.5%) thought that the PCHR was very good or good. Higher scores for the usage of the PCHR were significantly associated with teenage- (B=1.8, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.75) and first-time mothers (B=0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.4)
	Bjerkeli Grøvdal et al⁴⁴ Norway	RCT	Parent-held child health record	Positive	Some parents (65%) were satisfied with parent-held records, and 92% favoured making them permanently available. Satisfaction and support were especially high among parents of children with chronic diseases.
	Bhuiyan et al⁵⁸ Bangladesh	Mixed methods	MCH handbook	Positive	Most of the mothers (78%) perceived the MCH handbook as a useful tool.
	Grippo & Fracolli⁴⁵ Brazil	Mixed methods	Educational booklet	Mixed	The most important topics were ‘protect and care,’ followed by ‘children’s rights.’ The topic of ‘sick child and accident prevention’ appears to have minor importance among the emerged themes.
	Walton & Bedford⁴⁶ UK	Cross-sectional	PCHR	Positive	The level of maternal education that parents can document in their child’s PCHR made them (78%) happy.
	Engida & Simireta⁴⁹ Ethiopia	Qualitative	Speaking books	Positive	The speaking book is a good tool to deliver complete information. Caretakers trusted the messages and claimed that they were learning something new.
	Du Plessis et al⁵⁹ South Africa	Cross-sectional	RTH booklet health promotion messages	Mixed	Of 1644 caregivers, 68.7% found the messages very important, and 59% regarded them helpful. Some caregivers did not know why the messages were included in the booklet (2.4%) and were unsure of their purpose (2.9%).
	Ogawa et al⁶⁰ Japan	Cross-sectional	MCH handbook	Positive	The MCH handbook provided disaster preparedness knowledge, especially among mothers who used the self-reporting sections of the MCH handbook.
Satisfaction with services/provider performance	O’Flaherty et al⁶⁷ Australia	Prospective cohort	PHR	Mixed	Both parents and community health staff used PHRs frequently during health visits. However, most private doctors did not find them useful.
	Polnay & Roberts⁶⁸ UK	Prospective cohort	Nottingham baby book	Positive	The baby book was well used by most parents, with 80% of them had read all the content by the time their babies were 3 months old. The majority of the parents (70%) used the booklet until their children reached 1 year.
	Wright & Reynolds⁶⁹ UK	Prospective cohort	PCHR	Mixed	Parents used the record books for information and regularly took them to baby clinics for health services. Health visitors frequently wrote in the record, compared with only 50% of parents and less than 25% of family physicians.
	Lee et al⁵¹ USA	Qualitative	Patient passport	Positive	Families were satisfied with passport rounds. It added value to make families feel more secure and confident with discharge planning and understand the provision of care during hospitalisation.
	Gholipour et al⁷⁰ Iran	Cluster RCT	Maternity books	Positive	The use of maternity books coupled with group support sessions improved service quality and customer quality of maternity care. Mothers became more involved and engaged in the care process.

Mixed effect — home-based record showed some evidence of usefulness but not necessarily a significant effect.

MCH, maternal and child health; RCT, randomised controlled trial.