SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Incentives for increasing prenatal care use by women in order to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 6 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence for incentive-based strategies to promote breastfeeding: a systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- Incentives for pregnant mothers during antenatal care for better maternal and neonatal health outcomes in low and middle income countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.F1000Research · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Provision and uptake of routine antenatal services: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions during pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Incentives for increasing prenatal care use by women in order to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- The Effect of Financial Incentives on Adherence to Glucose Self-Monitoring during Pregnancy among Patients with Insulin-Requiring Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.American journal of perinatology · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Increasing Prenatal Care Compliance in At-Risk Black Women: Findings from a RCT of Patient Navigation and Behavioral Incentives.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Identifying age 26 as a threshold in psychosocial risks associated with child maltreatment among first-time mothers: a cross-sectional study in Japan.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Dietary patterns, polygenic risk, and kidney cancer incidence: a UK Biobank cohort study.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Alabama Screening and Intervention for Glaucoma and Eye Health Through Telemedicine (AL-SIGHT): The Impact of Financial Incentives on Health Care Engagement Following Telemedicine-Based Vision Screening.Current eye research · 2025Article
- Inadequacy of antenatal care attendance and its determinants amongst pregnant women in Ethiopia based on the 2019 Mini-Ethiopian demographic health survey: secondary data analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Suboptimal factors in maternal and newborn care for refugees: Lessons learned from perinatal audits in the Netherlands.PloS one · 2024Article
- Interventions to enhance healthcare utilisation among pregnant women to reduce maternal mortality in low- and middle-income countries: a review of systematic reviews.BMC public health · 2023Review
- Prenatal care and infant outcomes of teenage births: a Project WATCH study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Equity in antenatal care visits among adolescent mothers: An analysis of 54 country levels trend and projection of coverage from 2000 to 2030.Journal of global health · 2022Article
- Community-based Systems Dynamics for Reproductive Health: An Example from Urban Ohio.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2022Article
- Incentives for pregnant mothers during antenatal care for better maternal and neonatal health outcomes in low and middle income countries: A systematic review protocol.F1000Research · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrenatal care is recommended during pregnancy as a method to improve neonatal and maternal outcomes. Improving the use of prenatal care is important, particularly for women at moderate to high risk of adverse outcomes. Incentives are sometimes utilized to encourage women to attend prenatal care visits.
objectivesTo determine whether incentives are an effective tool to increase utilization of timely prenatal care among women. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 January 2015) and the reference lists of all retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs that utilized direct incentives to pregnant women explicitly linked to initiation and frequency of prenatal care were included. Incentives could include cash, vouchers, coupons or products not generally offered to women as a standard of prenatal care. Comparisons were to no incentives and to incentives not linked directly to utilization of care. We also planned to compare different types of interventions, i.e. monetary versus products or services. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and methodological quality. Two review authors independently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN
resultsWe identified 11 studies (19 reports), six of which we excluded. Five studies, involving 11,935 pregnancies were included, but only 1893 pregnancies contributed data regarding our specified outcomes. Incentives in the studies included cash, gift card, baby carrier, baby blanket or taxicab voucher and were compared with no incentives. Meta-analysis was performed for only one outcome 'Return for postpartum care' and this outcome was not pre-specified in our protocol. Other analyses were restricted to data from single studies.Trials were at a moderate risk of bias overall. Randomization and allocation were adequate and risk of selection bias was low in three studies and unclear in two studies. None of the studies were blinded to the participants. Blinding of outcome assessors was adequate in one study, but was limited or not described in the remaining four studies. Risk of attrition was deemed to be low in all studies that contributed data to the review. Two of the studies reported or analyzed data in a manner that was not consistent with the predetermined protocol and thus were deemed to be at high risk. The other three studies were low risk for reporting bias. The largest two of the five studies comprising the majority of participants took place in rural, low-income, homogenously Hispanic communities in Central America. This setting introduces a number of confounding factors that may affect generalizability of these findings to ethnically and economically diverse urban communities in developed countries.The five included studies of incentive programs did not report any of this review's primary outcomes: preterm birth, small-for-gestational age, or perinatal death.In terms of this review's secondary outcomes, pregnant women receiving incentives were no more likely to initiate prenatal care (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.38, one study, 104 pregnancies). Pregnant women receiving incentives were more likely to attend prenatal visits on a frequent basis (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.38, one study, 606 pregnancies) and obtain adequate prenatal care defined by number of "procedures" such as testing blood sugar or blood pressure, vaccinations and counseling about breastfeeding and birth control (mean difference (MD) 5.84, 95% CI 1.88 to 9.80, one study, 892 pregnancies). In contrast, women who received incentives were more likely to deliver by cesarean section (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.30, one study, 979 pregnancies) compared to those women who did not receive incentives.Women who received incentives were no more likely to return for postpartum care based on results of meta-analysis (average RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.64, two studies, 833 pregnancies, Tau² = 0.81, I² = 98%). However, there was substantial heterogeneity in this analysis so a subgroup analysis was performed and this identified a clear difference between subgroups based on the type of incentive being offered. In one study, women receiving non-cash incentives were more likely to return for postpartum care (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.47, 240 pregnancies) than women who did not receive non-cash incentives. In another study, women receiving cash incentives were less likely to return for postpartum care (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62, 593 pregnancies) than women who did not receive cash incentives.No data were identified for the following secondary outcomes: frequency of prenatal care; pre-eclampsia; satisfaction with birth experience; maternal mortality; low birthweight (less than 2500 g); infant macrosomia (birthweight greater than 4000 g); or five-minute Apgar less than seven. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe included studies did not report on this review's main outcomes: preterm birth, small-for-gestational age, or perinatal death. There is limited evidence that incentives may increase utilization and quality of prenatal care, but may also increase cesarean rate. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to fully evaluate the impact of incentives on prenatal care initiation. There are conflicting data as to the impact of incentives on return for postpartum care. Two of the five studies which accounted for the majority of women in this review were conducted in rural, low-income, overwhelmingly Hispanic communities in Central America, thus limiting the external validity of these results.There is a need for high-quality RCTs to determine whether incentive program increase prenatal care use and improve maternal and neonatal outcomes. Incentive programs, in particular cash-based programs, as suggested in this review and in several observational studies may improve the frequency and ensure adequate quality of prenatal care. No peer-reviewed data have been made publicly available for one of the largest incentive-based prenatal programs - the statewide Medicaid-based programs within the United States. These observational data represent an important starting point for future research with significant implications for policy development and allocation of healthcare resources. The disparate findings related to attending postpartum care should also be further explored as the findings were limited by the number of studies. Future large RCTs are needed to focus on the outcomes of preterm birth, small-for-gestational age and perinatal outcomes.
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.