Factors Determining the Choice of Place of Birth among Pregnant Women: A Cross-Sectional Study

The choice of childbirth setting involves access to care, previous birth experiences, family preferences, and expectations concerning the quality of maternity services. Understanding these considerations may support more responsive service planning, although women’s reported reasons should be distinguished from statistically established determinants. This study aimed to describe factors reported as influencing the choice of birth location among women attending maternity services in Basrah, Iraq, and to summarize their demographic and obstetric characteristics. A descriptive cross-sectional study included 100 women recruited from public and private hospitals and other maternity settings between January 18, 2024, and March 12, 2025. The questionnaire comprised a demographic and obstetric section and 25 yes/no items concerning the choice of delivery setting. The manuscript reports review by ten experts and pilot testing with 20 mothers, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.71. Responses were summarized using frequencies and the reported item means, with yes coded as 2 and no as 1. The largest reported age group was 20–25 years, accounting for 34% of participants; the reported mean age was 29.64 ± 7.56 years. Secondary education was reported for 33% of women and 34% of husbands. Two and three previous children were each reported by 27% of respondents. Housewives accounted for 49%, and 51% reported that their husbands did not work. A history of obstetric difficulties was reported by 67%; 66% lived in rural areas, 79% were classified as having normal body mass index, 74% reported at least four antenatal visits, and 75% reported completed vaccination. Choosing one’s own doctor was endorsed by 77%, being at the location by chance by 71%, family or maternal choice by 68%, and complications in a previous pregnancy by 58%. Eight items met the manuscript’s descriptive mean-score threshold of 1.50. However, the age frequencies sum to 99 rather than 100, the proximity item contains 110 responses, and some means and obstetric-history responses require verification. The reported delivery-location percentages also lack a consistent denominator and cannot establish a reliable distribution of birth settings. Consequently, the findings should be interpreted as provisional descriptive patterns. They suggest that provider preference, family involvement, previous experience, and practical circumstances merit further investigation; they do not identify independent predictors or demonstrate relationships between demographic characteristics and delivery location. Verification of the source records and clearer reporting of recruitment, measurement, and analysis are required before firm conclusions can be drawn.