Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26229190›Full record

SynthesisBulletin of the World Health Organization2015

Inequities in postnatal care in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Étienne V Langlois, Malgorzata Miszkurka, Maria Victoria Zunzunegui, Abdul Ghaffar, Daniela Ziegler, Igor Karp

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 122 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed, 13 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

122 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Postpartum depression in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2017
    Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

62 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Étienne V LangloisAlliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland .
Malgorzata MiszkurkaResearch Centre of the University of Montreal Hospital Centre, Quebec, Canada .
Maria Victoria ZunzuneguiResearch Centre of the University of Montreal Hospital Centre, Quebec, Canada .
Abdul GhaffarAlliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland .
Daniela ZieglerLibrary of the University of Montreal Hospital Centre, Quebec, Canada .
Igor KarpDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada .

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the socioeconomic, geographical and demographic inequities in the use of postnatal health-care services in low- and middle-income countries.

methodsWe searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central databases and grey literature for experimental, quasi-experimental and observational studies that had been conducted in low- and middle-income countries. We summarized the relevant studies qualitatively and performed meta-analyses of the use of postnatal care services according to selected indicators of socioeconomic status and residence in an urban or rural setting.

findingsA total of 36 studies were included in the narrative synthesis and 10 of them were used for the meta-analyses. Compared with women in the lowest quintile of socioeconomic status, the pooled odds ratios for use of postnatal care by women in the second, third, fourth and fifth quintiles were: 1.14 (95% confidence interval, CI : 0.96-1.34), 1.32 (95% CI: 1.12-1.55), 1.60 (95% CI: 1.30-1.98) and 2.27 (95% CI: 1.75-2.93) respectively. Compared to women living in rural settings, the pooled odds ratio for the use of postnatal care by women living in urban settings was 1.36 (95% CI: 1.01-1.81). A qualitative assessment of the relevant published data also indicated that use of postnatal care services increased with increasing level of education.

conclusionIn low- and middle-income countries, use of postnatal care services remains highly inequitable and varies markedly with socioeconomic status and between urban and rural residents.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPostnatal CarePovertyPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID26229190
PMCPMC4431556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.