Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20533083›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2011

Explaining ethnic differences in late antenatal care entry by predisposing, enabling and need factors in The Netherlands. The Generation R Study.

A A Choté, G T Koopmans, W K Redekop, C J M de Groot, R J Hoefman, V W V Jaddoe, A Hofman, E A P Steegers, J P Mackenbach, M Trappenburg and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Maternal healthcare in migrants: a systematic review.Maternal and child health journal · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Association between Migrant Women's Legal Status and Prenatal Care Utilization in the PreCARE Cohort.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

A A ChotéDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. chote@bmg.eur.nl
G T Koopmans
W K Redekop
C J M de Groot
R J Hoefman
V W V Jaddoe
A Hofman
E A P Steegers
J P Mackenbach
M Trappenburg
M Foets

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite compulsory health insurance in Europe, ethnic differences in access to health care exist. The objective of this study is to investigate how ethnic differences between Dutch and non-Dutch women with respect to late entry into antenatal care provided by community midwifes can be explained by need, predisposing and enabling factors. Data were obtained from the Generation R Study. The Generation R Study is a multi-ethnic population-based prospective cohort study conducted in the city of Rotterdam. In total, 2,093 pregnant women with a Dutch, Moroccan, Turkish, Cape Verdean, Antillean, Surinamese Creole and Surinamese Hindustani background were included in this study. We examined whether ethnic differences in late antenatal care entry could be explained by need, predisposing and enabling factors. Subsequently, logistic regression analysis was used to assess the independent role of explanatory variables in the timing of antenatal care entry. The main outcome measure was late entry into antenatal care (gestational age at first visit after 14 weeks). With the exception of Surinamese-Hindustani women, the percentage of mothers entering antenatal care late was higher in all non-Dutch compared to Dutch mothers. We could explain differences between Turkish (OR = 0.95, CI: 0.57-1.58), Cape Verdean (OR = 1.65. CI: 0.96-2.82) and Dutch women. Other differences diminished but remained significant (Moroccan: OR = 1,74, CI: 1.07-2.85; Dutch Antillean OR 1.80, CI: 1.04-3.13). We found that non-Dutch mothers were more likely to enter antenatal care later than Dutch mothers. Because we are unable to explain fully the differences regarding Moroccan, Surinamese-Creole and Antillean women, future research should focus on differences between 1st and 2nd generation migrants, as well as on language barriers that may hinder access to adequate information about the Dutch obstetric system.

Indexed as

AdultCabo VerdeCausalityCohort StudiesFemaleGestational AgeHumansMidwiferyMoroccoNetherlandsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnancyPrenatal CareSurinameTime FactorsTurkey

Identifiers

PMID20533083
PMCPMC3131512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.