Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27231539›Full record

SynthesisJournal of global health2016

Integration of antenatal care services with health programmes in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review.

Thyra E de Jongh, Ipek Gurol-Urganci, Elizabeth Allen, Nina Jiayue Zhu, Rifat Atun

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of global health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Use of integrated services in antenatal care: A case study of Mabvuku Polyclinic, Zimbabwe.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

5 authors.

Thyra E de JonghTechnopolis Group, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Ipek Gurol-UrganciLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Elizabeth AllenDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston MA, USA.
Nina Jiayue ZhuDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston MA, USA.
Rifat AtunDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntenatal care (ANC) presents a potentially valuable platform for integrated delivery of additional health services for pregnant women-services that are vital to reduce the persistently high rates of maternal and neonatal mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, there is limited evidence on the impact of integrating health services with ANC to guide policy. This review assesses the impact of integration of postnatal and other health services with ANC on health services uptake and utilisation, health outcomes and user experience of care in LMICs.

methodsCochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, POPLINE and Global Health were searched for studies that compared integrated models for delivery of postnatal and other health services with ANC to non-integrated models. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) criteria and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, depending on the study design. Due to high heterogeneity no meta-analysis could be conducted. Results are presented narratively.

findings12 studies were included in the review. Limited evidence, with moderate- to high-risk of bias, suggests that integrated service delivery results in improved uptake of essential health services for women, earlier initiation of treatment, and better health outcomes. Women also reported improved satisfaction with integrated services.

conclusionsThe reported evidence is largely based on non-randomised studies with poor generalizability, and therefore offers very limited policy guidance. More rigorously conducted and geographically diverse studies are needed to better ascertain and quantify the health and economic benefits of integrating health services with ANC.

Indexed as

AdultDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedFemaleHumansInfantInfant MortalityMaternal MortalityPovertyPregnancyPrenatal Care

Identifiers

PMID27231539
PMCPMC4871065

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.