I was able to read the article. 1st, it seems to contradict itself. In one part it says only low risk births were included, in another spot it says the reason CNMW's (what does the W after CNM stand for anyway?) have better stats than the docs is because the docs have a higher risk population... huh... didn't they just say only low risk births were used? that kinda blows their credibility in my eyes! Also, not from that article, but from another source about the same study, I read that UC (planned & unplanned) births were included. It's not fair to lump UC stats onto the homebirth midwives stats.
CNM's may have worse stats for their homebirths than they do for their hospital births, because their training is mostly or all in hospital births, as is the docs training. The BMJ homebirth stats looked better because it looked at CPM's whose training is in the home, therefore are better prepared for dealing with emergencies in that setting than the HCP's that are training to use fancy equipment instead of their hands.