Trial reportBMC health services research2011
Evaluation of a community-based randomized controlled prenatal care trial in rural China.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Community-based maternal and newborn educational care packages for improving neonatal health and survival in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Midwifery-led antenatal care models: mapping a systematic review to an evidence-based quality framework to identify key components and characteristics of care.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2016Pooled it
- Home-based neonatal care by community health workers for preventing mortality in neonates in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2016Pooled it
- Health system and community level interventions for improving antenatal care coverage and health outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Community-based intervention packages for reducing maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality and improving neonatal outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Impact of financial and educational interventions on maternity care: results of cluster randomized trials in rural China, CHIMACA.Maternal and child health journal · 2013Trial
- Article
- Community mobilization to strengthen support for appropriate and timely use of antenatal and postnatal care: A review of reviews.Journal of global health · 2021Review
- Health facility readiness and facility-based birth in Haiti: a maximum likelihood approach to linking household and facility data.Journal of global health reports · 2018Article
- Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA community-based randomized control prenatal care trial was performed in a rural county of China during 2000-2003. The purpose of this paper is to describe the trial implementation and the impact of the trial on the utilization of prenatal care and perinatal outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn the study county, 10 townships (from a total of 55) were each paired with a control (20 study townships in total), with the criteria for pairing being the township's socioeconomic development, perinatal health, and maternal care utilization and provision. One of each township pair was randomly allocated to the intervention or control groups. The trial interventions were: 1) training township hospital midwives and instructing them in how to provide systematic maternal care, 2) informing women in the community of the importance of prenatal care, 3) if needed, providing basic medical instruments to the hospitals. A variety of data sources were used to describe the trial implementation (observations, group discussions, field notes, survey to women). The data on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes were from the original hand-written work-records in the village family planning centers of the study townships.
resultsImplementation of the intervention was deficient. The factors hindering the trial implementation included poor coordination between midwives and family planning officers, broader policy changes implemented by the provincial government during the trial, the decentralization of county governance, and the lack of government funding for maternal care. There was only little difference in the use of maternal care, in women's opinions related to maternal care or content of prenatal care, and no difference in the perinatal outcomes between the intervention and control townships.
conclusionsA community based randomized controlled trial could not be fully carried out in rural China as planned due to the changing political landscape, the complexity of the socio-economic situation and a lengthy planning stage. The study could not answer if perinatal outcomes could be improved by increased use of prenatal care.
trial registrationNCT 01054235.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.