Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25798847›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Access and use of interventions to prevent and treat malaria among pregnant women in Kenya and Mali: a qualitative study.

Jenny Hill, Kassoum Kayentao, Florence Achieng, Samba Diarra, Stephanie Dellicour, Sory I Diawara, Mary J Hamel, Peter Ouma, Meghna Desai, Ogobara K Doumbo and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. African Herbal Medicines: Adverse Effects and Cytotoxic Potentials with Different Therapeutic Applications.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  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

12 authors.

Jenny HillDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Kassoum KayentaoMalaria Research and Training Centre, University of Sciences, Techniques and Technologies of Bamako, Mali.
Florence AchiengKenya Medical Research Institute/Center for Global Health Research, Kisumu, Kenya.
Samba DiarraMalaria Research and Training Centre, University of Sciences, Techniques and Technologies of Bamako, Mali.
Stephanie DellicourDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Sory I DiawaraMalaria Research and Training Centre, University of Sciences, Techniques and Technologies of Bamako, Mali.
Mary J HamelCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America and Kenya.
Peter OumaKenya Medical Research Institute/Center for Global Health Research, Kisumu, Kenya.
Meghna DesaiCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America and Kenya.
Ogobara K DoumboMalaria Research and Training Centre, University of Sciences, Techniques and Technologies of Bamako, Mali.
Feiko O ter KuileDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Jayne WebsterDisease Control Department, London School of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoverage of malaria in pregnancy interventions in sub-Saharan Africa is suboptimal. We undertook a systematic examination of the operational, socio-economic and cultural constraints to pregnant women's access to intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp), long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and case management in Kenya and Mali to provide empirical evidence for strategies to improve coverage.

methodsFocus group discussions (FGDs) were held as part of a programme of research to explore the delivery, access and use of interventions to control malaria in pregnancy. FGDs were held with four sub-groups: non-pregnant women of child bearing age (aged 15-49 years), pregnant women or mothers of children aged <1 year, adolescent women, and men. Content analysis was used to develop themes and sub-themes from the data.

resultsWomen and men's perceptions of the benefits of antenatal care were generally positive; motivation among women consisted of maintaining a healthy pregnancy, disease prevention in mother and foetus, checking the position of the baby in preparation for delivery, and ensuring admission to a facility in case of complications. Barriers to accessing care related to the quality of the health provider-client interaction, perceived health provider skills and malpractice, drug availability, and cost of services. Pregnant women perceived themselves and their babies at particular risk from malaria, and valued diagnosis and treatment from a health professional, but cost of treatment at health facilities drove women to use herbal remedies or drugs bought from shops. Women lacked information on the safety, efficacy and side effects of antimalarial use in pregnancy.

conclusionWomen in these settings appreciated the benefits of antenatal care and yet health services in both countries are losing women to follow-up due to factors that can be improved with greater political will. Antenatal services need to be patient-centred, free-of-charge or highly affordable and accountable to the women they serve.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CareAdolescentAdultAntimalarialsCase ManagementDelivery of Health CareEarly Intervention, EducationalFemaleFocus GroupsHumansImmunologic TestsInfantInfant, NewbornInsecticide-Treated BednetsKenyaMalariaAntimalarials

Identifiers

PMID25798847
PMCPMC4370378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.