ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2016
Determinants of institutional birth among women in rural Nepal: a mixed-methods cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and associated factors of caesarean section delivery: analysis from the Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 2022.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Successful task shifting: a mixed-methods cross-sectional evaluation of an emergency obstetric care program to increase access to cesarean sections in rural Nepal.Global health action · 2024Article
- High risk fertility behaviour and health facility delivery in West Africa.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Prevalence and Factors Associated With Caesarean Delivery in Nepal: Evidence From a Nationally Representative Sample.Cureus · 2021Article
- Community-based postpartum contraceptive counselling in rural Nepal: a mixed-methods evaluation.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2020Article
- Measuring fidelity, feasibility, costs: an implementation evaluation of a cluster-controlled trial of group antenatal care in rural Nepal.Reproductive health · 2020Article
- Barriers and facilitators to institutional delivery in rural areas of Chitwan district, Nepal: a qualitative study.Reproductive health · 2018Article
- Role of the general practitioner in improving rural healthcare access: a case from Nepal.Human resources for health · 2018Article
- An integrated community health worker intervention in rural Nepal: a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2018Article
- Impact of the roll out of comprehensive emergency obstetric care on institutional birth rate in rural Nepal.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEncouraging institutional birth is an important component of reducing maternal mortality in low-resource settings. This study aims to identify and understand the determinants of persistently low institutional birth in rural Nepal, with the goal of informing future interventions to reduce high rates of maternal mortality.
methodsPostpartum women giving birth in the catchment area population of a district-level hospital in the Far-Western Development Region of Nepal were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey in 2012 about their recent birth experience. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to determine the institutional birth rate, social and demographic predictors of institutional birth, and barriers to institutional birth.
resultsThe institutional birth rate for the hospital's catchment area population was calculated to be 0.30 (54 home births, 23 facility births). Institutional birth was more likely as age decreased (ORs in the range of 0.20-0.28) and as income increased (ORs in the range of 1.38-1.45). Institutional birth among women who owned land was less likely (OR = 0.82 [0.71, 0.92]). Ninety percent of participants in the institutional birth group identified safety and good care as the most important factors determining location of birth, whereas 60 % of participants in the home birth group reported distance from hospital as a key determinant of location of birth. Qualitative analysis elucidated the importance of social support, financial resources, birth planning, awareness of services, perception of safety, and referral capacity in achieving an institutional birth.
conclusionAge, income, and land ownership, but not patient preference, were key predictors of institutional birth. Most women believed that birth at the hospital was safer regardless of where they gave birth. Future interventions to increase rates of institutional birth should address structural barriers including differences in socioeconomic status, social support, transportation resources, and birth preparedness.
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.