BACKGROUND: Birth satisfaction is shaped by social context, yet its assessment faces methodological challenges, particularly in marginalized populations. This study examines birth satisfaction among incarcerated and non-incarcerated women, considering both experiential disparities and potential measurement biases. METHODS: A nested retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted with 55 incarcerated women who had given birth prior to incarceration and 79 women from the general population in the Czech Republic. Birth satisfaction was assessed using the Birth Satisfaction Scale-Revised. All participants completed a standardized pencil-and-paper survey. Responses between incarcerated and non-incarcerated participants were compared, and pencil-and-paper responses of non-incarcerated participants were compared with survey-only administration to validate the survey method. RESULTS: Incarcerated women reported significantly higher birth satisfaction scores than those in the general population. In the prison population, higher birth satisfaction correlated positively with self-esteem and negatively with PTSD symptoms. Comparison of pen-and-paper and online survey administration in the general population revealed no significant differences, supporting confidence in the equivalence of paper and pencil data capture method in the incarcerated population. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of context in birth satisfaction assessments, as incarcerated women's experiences may be shaped by institutional constraints and psychological dynamics. Ensuring methodological consistency is essential for valid cross-population comparisons and the accurate interpretation of birth satisfaction data.

Department of Emergency Medicine Diagnostic Disciplines and Public Health Faculty of Health Care Studies University of West Bohemia Pilsen Czech Republic

Department of Infectious Diseases and Travel Medicine Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen Charles University alej Svobody 1655 76 Pilsen 323 00 Czech Republic

Institute of Health and Wellbeing University of Suffolk Ipswich UK

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Sahlin M, Carlander-Klint A-K, Hildingsson I, Wiklund I. First-time mothers’ wish for a planned caesarean section: deeply rooted emotions. Midwifery. 2013;29:447–52. PubMed

Roqueta-Vall-llosera M, Cámara-Liebana D, Serrat-Graboleda E, Salleras-Duran L, Buxó-Pujolràs M, Fuentes-Pumarola C et al. Predictors of a positive birth experience in childbirth: A cross-sectional study. Heliyon. 2024;10(19):e38262. PubMed PMC

Hosseini Tabaghdehi M, Kolahdozan S, Keramat A, Shahhossein Z, Moosazadeh M, Motaghi Z. Prevalence and factors affecting the negative childbirth experiences: a systematic review. J Maternal-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;33:3849–56. PubMed

Ayers S, Sawyer A. The impact of birth on women’s health and wellbeing. In: Taubman– Ben-Ari O, editor. Pathways and barriers to parenthood: existential concerns regarding fertility, pregnancy, and early parenthood. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. pp. 199–218.

Smorti M, Ponti L, Ghinassi S, Rapisardi G. The mother-child attachment bond before and after birth: the role of maternal perception of traumatic childbirth. Early Hum Dev. 2020;142:104956. PubMed

Shorey S, Yang YY, Ang E. The impact of negative childbirth experience on future reproductive decisions: a quantitative systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74:1236–44. PubMed

Hollins Martin CJ, Martin CR. Development and psychometric properties of the birth satisfaction scale-revised (BSS-R). Midwifery. 2014;30:610–9. PubMed

Yuill C, McCourt C, Cheyne H, Leister N. Women’s experiences of decision-making and informed choice about pregnancy and birth care: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:343. PubMed PMC

Waldenström U. Experience of labor and birth in 1111 women. J Psychosom Res. 1999;47:471–82. PubMed

Volkert A, Bach L, Hagenbeck C, Kössendrup J, Oberröhrmann C, Okumu M-R, et al. Obstetric interventions’ effects on the birthing experience. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024;24:508. PubMed PMC

Lemola S, Stadlmayr W, Grob A. Maternal adjustment five months after birth: the impact of the subjective experience of childbirth and emotional support from the partner. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2007;25:190–202.

Waldenström U. Why do some women change their opinion about childbirth over time?? Birth. 2004;31(2):102–7. PubMed

Campbell EE, Seabrook JA. The influence of Socio- economic status on adverse birth outcomes. Can J Midwifery Res Pract. 2016;15:10–20.

Taştekin E, Bayhan P. A grounded theory study on psychological health of mothers with premature infants-becoming a marginalized mother. Curr Psychol. 2024. 10.1007/s12144-024-07137-4.

Lochmannová A. Health literacy behind bars: a hidden burden of incarceration. Sociologia. 2025;57:124–53.

Lochmannová A, Kolář O, Martin CR. The birth experience of women in the Czech prison system. Int J Childbirth. 2024;14:163–72.

Jäckle A, Roberts C, Lynn P. Assessing the effect of data collection mode on measurement. Int Stat Rev. 2010;78:3–20.

Lefever S, Dal M, Matthíasdóttir Á. Online data collection in academic research: advantages and limitations. Br J Educ Technol. 2007;38:574–82.

Sivakumar V. Prison research: challenges in securing permission and data collection. Sociol Methods Res. 2021;50:348–64.

Martin CR, Hollins Martin CJ, Burduli E, Barbosa-Leiker C, Donovan-Batson C, Fleming SE. The birth satisfaction Scale– Revised (BSS-R): should the subscale scores or the total score be used? J Reproductive Infant Psychol. 2018;36:530–5. PubMed

Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh postnatal depression scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782–6. PubMed

Martin CR, Redshaw M. Establishing a coherent and replicable measurement model of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale. Psychiatry Res. 2018;264:182–91. PubMed PMC

Břicháček V, Břicháčková V, Urbanová M. Edinburghská Škála postnatální deprese: ověření v České Republice. CZ: Iga MZ ČR; 2000.

Park S-H, Kim J-I. Predictive validity of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and other tools for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023;307:1331–45. PubMed

Rosenberg M. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton University Press; 1965.

García JA, Olmos FC y, Matheu ML, Carreño TP. Self esteem levels vs global scores on the Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Heliyon. 2019;5(3):e01378. PubMed PMC

Prins A, Kleinsmidt L, Khan N, Kirby B, Kudanga T, Vollmer J, et al. The effect of mutations near the T1 copper site on the biochemical characteristics of the small laccase from PubMed

Ratislavová K, Hendrych Lorenzová E, Hollins Martin CJ, Martin CR. Translation and validation of the Czech Republic version of the birth satisfaction scale-revised (BSS-R). J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2024;42:78–94. PubMed

Lima TJSD, Souza LECD. Rosenberg self-esteem scale: method effect and gender invariance. Psico-USF. 2019;24:517–28.

Horáková A, Nosková E, Švancer P, Marciánová V, Koliba P, Šebela A. Accuracy of the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale in screening for major depressive disorder and other psychiatric disorders in women towards the end of their puerperium. Ceska Gynekol. 2022;87:19–26. PubMed

Fiala A, Švancara J, Klánová J, Kašpárek T. Sociodemographic and delivery risk factors for developing postpartum depression in a sample of 3233 mothers from the Czech ELSPAC study. BMC Psychiatry. 2017;17:104. PubMed PMC

de Lima TJS, de Souza LEC. Rosenberg self-esteem scale: method effect and gender invariance. Psico-USF. 2019;24:517–28.

Kalimeri K, Beiró MG, Bonanomi A, Rosina A, Cattuto C. Traditional versus Facebook-based surveys: evaluation of biases in self-reported demographic and psychometric information. Demogr Res. 2020;42:133–48.

Vedeler C, Nilsen A, Blix E, Downe S, Eri T. What women emphasise as important aspects of care in childbirth– an online survey. BJOG. 2022;129:647–55. PubMed

Khalid A, Haider KA, Ahmer H, Noorani S, Hoodbhoy Z. Why do women still give birth at home; perceptions of Pakistani women and decision-makers from marginalized communities. PLOS Global Public Health. 2023;3:e0002217. PubMed PMC

Dirga L, Lochmannová A, Juříček P. The structure of the inmate population in Czech prisons. Sociológia. 2016;47:559–78.

Lochmannová A, Martin CR. Exploring the role of social support in postpartum well-being with a psychometric approach. Bratisl Med J. 2025. 10.1007/s44411-025-00060-5.

Hoffmann L, Banse R. Psychological aspects of childbirth: evidence for a birth-related mindset. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2021;51(1):124–51.

Baćak V, Andersen LH, Schnittker J. The effect of timing of incarceration on mental health: evidence from a natural experiment. Soc Forces. 2019;98:303–28.

Fichtler H, Zimmermann RR, Moore RT. Comparison of Self-Esteem of prison and Non-Prison groups. Percept Mot Skills. 1973;36:39–44. PubMed

Homant RJ, Dean DG. The effect of prisonization and self esteem on inmates’ career maturity. J Offender Rehabil. 1988;12:19–40.

Raudasoja M, Sorkkila M, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Tolvanen A, Aunola K. The role of self-esteem on fear of childbirth and birth experience. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2024;42:493–501. PubMed

Robertson RE, Tran FW, Lewark LN, Epstein R. Estimates of Non-Heterosexual prevalence: the roles of anonymity and privacy in survey methodology. Arch Sex Behav. 2018;47:1069–84. PubMed