ArticleISRN obstetrics and gynecology2011
An Evaluation of the Timing and Use of Healthcare during Pregnancy in Birmingham, UK and Pretoria, South Africa.
Article in ISRN obstetrics and gynecology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the pregnant women's approaches regarding drug utilization.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2021Article
- Viral suppression and factors associated with failure to achieve viral suppression among pregnant women in South Africa.AIDS (London, England) · 2020Article
- Exploring the pregnant women's perspective of late booking of antenatal care services at Mbekweni Health Centre in Eastern Cape, South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2018Article
- Factors affecting the overcrowding in outpatient healthcare.Journal of education and health promotion · 2017Article
- Stepped care for maternal mental health: a case study of the perinatal mental health project in South Africa.PLoS medicine · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective. A pilot study to compare the rates of antenatal healthcare use in Birmingham, UK and Pretoria, South Africa, and identify differences in knowledge and perception of antenatal healthcare. Subjects. 62 women, 31 at each location <24 hours after delivery. Results. Women from Birmingham use healthcare services earlier (P ≤ .0001) and more often during pregnancy (P ≤ .0001). Women from Birmingham identified more conditions that may affect pregnancy (median 6 versus 3 reasons) and were less aware of HIV. In addition they perceived antenatal healthcare as relatively more important for advice and reassurance about pregnancy, whilst women from Pretoria had more problems with transport and clinic overcrowding. Conclusions. Increasing education on the importance of antenatal healthcare and medical problems during pregnancy may help improve antenatal healthcare use in Pretoria. Improving transport links and overcrowding in clinics in Pretoria may also help increase use. Measuring maternal outcomes and confirming these findings in a larger population are important for future studies.
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.