S026661381300048X 61. Healy S, Humphreys E, Kennedy C. Midwives’ and obstetricians’ perceptions of risk and its impact on clinical practice and decision-making in labour: An integrative review. Women and Birth [Internet]. 2016 Apr;29(2):107– 16. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1871519215002917 62. Romijn A, Muijtjens AMM, De Bruijne MC, Donkers HHLM, Wagner C, De Groot CJM, et al. What is normal progress in the first stage of labour? A vignette study of similarities and differences between midwives and obstetricians. Midwifery [Internet]. 2016 Oct;41:104–9. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/ retrieve/pii/S0266613816301401 63. Reime B, Klein MC, Kelly A, Duxbury N, Saxell L, Liston R, et al. Do maternity care provider groups have different attitudes towards birth? BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol [Internet]. 2004 Dec;111(12):1388–93. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00338.x 64. Nippita TA, Porter M, Seeho SK, Morris JM, Roberts CL. Variation in clinical decision-making for induction of labour: A qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth [Internet]. 2017 Dec 22;17(1):317. Available from: http:// bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-017-1518-y 65. Jefford E, Fahy K, Sundin D. Decision-making theories and their usefulness to the midwifery profession both in terms of midwifery practice and the education of midwives. Int J Nurs Pract [Internet]. 2011 Jun;17(3):246–53. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2010.01900.x 66. Roome S, Hartz D, Tracy S, Welsh AW. Why such differing stances? A review of position statements on home birth from professional colleges. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol [Internet]. 2016 Feb;123(3):376–82. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.13594 67. Croskerry P. Achieving quality in clinical decisionmaking: Cognitive strategies and detection of bias. Acad Emerg Med [Internet]. 2002 Nov;9(11):1184–204. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2002. tb01574.x 68. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science (80- ). 185:1124–31. 69. Cioffi J, Markham R. Clinical decision‐making by midwives: Managing case Complexity. J Adv Nurs [Internet]. 1997 Feb 28;25(2):265–72. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.13652648.1997.1997025265.x 70. Slovic P, FischhoffB, Lichtenstein S. Rating the risks. Environ Sci Policy SustainDev [Internet]. 1979 Apr;21(3):14– 39. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00139157.1979.9933091 71. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In: Societal Risk Assessment [Internet]. Boston, MA: Springer US; 1980. p. 181–216. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-14899-0445-4_9 72. Sjöberg L. Emotions and risk perception. Risk Manag. 2007;223–37. 73. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science (80- ) [Internet]. 1987 Apr 17;236(4799):280–5. Available from: https:// www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.3563507 74. Apostolakis GE. How useful is quantitative risk assessment? Risk Anal [Internet]. 2004 Jun;24(3):515–20. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00455.x 75. Zinn JO. ‘In-between’ and other reasonable ways to deal with risk and uncertainty: A review article. Health Risk Soc [Internet]. 2016 Nov 16;18(7–8):348–66. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1 3698575.2016.1269879 180 7 CHAPTER 7
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw