RNOtherRevista brasileira de enfermagem2026

Development and validation of a serial album on pregnancy for expectant mothers and healthcare professionals.

Leandro da Silva de Medeiros, Alice Guadagnini Leite, Marli Terezinha Stein Backes and 3 others

PMID 41637299

WHAT IT FOUND

Pregnant women and experts rated a 30-page prenatal album clear and relevant.

Twelve women gave 100% positive responses, and expert agreement was 0.92. Nurses can use it as an education aid; it was not tested for birth outcomes.

Key findings

01The album received an expert agreement score of 0.92 from 18 judges.

02Twelve pregnant women gave 100% positive responses on the album evaluation.

03The final album was 30 pages and included content on trimesters, postpartum, home care, first aid, childcare, and QR-code videos.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The album was developed and validated only in a specific region of southern Brazil, so it may not fit other languages, cultures, or health systems. The study tested content agreement and user acceptability, not whether the album improved prenatal care, maternal outcomes, newborn outcomes, or clinician behavior. The pregnant woman sample was small, with 12 participants from two primary care centers, and inclusion required at least four years of schooling. The expert sample was 18 judges, and the paper does not report how many items were changed or how disagreements were resolved beyond the validation thresholds. The initial interviews with pregnant and postpartum women did not report a participant count, so the need assessment cannot be checked. There was no comparison group or follow-up of care.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the 0.92 expert agreement and 100% positive ratings as proof that the album improves prenatal care or birth outcomes. The study measured content validity and acceptability, not clinical effects.

Read it on PubMed →