Table 4 Table 3 distribution of the percentages of the level of self-reported staff confidence who took part in the study. The table shows the staff divided by role (Doctor or midwives) and subdivide by grading within the role. Band-5, Midwife within the preceptorship program usually 1-2 years post qualification. Band-6, experience midwives who works autonomously, usually 2 to 6 years post qualification. Band-7 midwife very senior midwife, usually <7 years post qualification and acting as co-ordinator or specialist midwife. Junior doctor usually 3 years post qualification. Senior doctor usually 4-8 years post qualification. Consultant >9-10 post qualification. Midwife wit

Figures

Figure-1: Copy of the five anonymised colour-printed CTG traced with their relevant clinical history that has been used in the study.
Figure-2: Radial graph that represents the background knowledge distribution of all doctors and all midwives. The staff were asked to rank from 1-5 which source of knowledge helped them most in analysing each CTG. The options given were: 1) uses of current guidelines, 2) own knowledge in fetal physiology, 3) previous experience, 4) opinion of someone more senior and 5) similar case(s) previously discussed during a CTG meeting/training.
Figure-3: Radial graph that represents the background knowledge distribution of all midwives clustered by midwifery banding. The staff were asked to rank from 1-5 which source of knowledge helped them most in analysing each CTG. The options given were: 1) uses of current guidelines, 2) own knowledge in fetal physiology, 3) previous experience, 4) opinion of someone more senior and 5) similar case(s) previously discussed during a CTG meeting/training.
Figure-4: Radial graph that represents the background knowledge distribution of all doctors clustered medical grading. The staff were asked to rank from 1-5 which source of knowledge helped them most in analysing each CTG. The options given were: 1) uses of current guidelines, 2) own knowledge in fetal physiology, 3) previous experience, 4) opinion of someone more senior and 5) similar case(s) previously discussed during a CTG meeting/training
Figure-5: Pie-Chart illustrating the proportional distribution of the level of confidence of the total staff taking part in the study. The staff were asked to rank the level of confidence over 7 possible points from ‘not confident at all’ to ‘very confident’. The point were clustered post-hoc for analytical purposes.