Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27581489›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2016

Growing inequities in maternal health in South Africa: a comparison of serial national household surveys.

Njeri Wabiri, Matthew Chersich, Olive Shisana, Duane Blaauw, Helen Rees, Ntabozuko Dwane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Impact of COVID-19 on maternal healthcare in Africa and the way forward.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Njeri WabiriEpidemiology and Strategic Information Unit, Human Sciences Research Council, Pretoria, South Africa. nwabiri@hsrc.ac.za.ORCID 0000-0002-7436-3504
Matthew ChersichWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Olive ShisanaEvidence Based Solutions, Cape Town, South Africa.
Duane BlaauwCentre for Health Policy, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Helen ReesWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Ntabozuko DwaneEpidemiology and Strategic Information Unit, Human Sciences Research Council, Pretoria, South Africa.

Funding

PS06-614, S. Africa: Improve Capacity of an Indigenous Institute to Enhance M&E of HIV/AIDS in SAU2GPS000570 · PS · HUMAN SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL · PI SIMBAYI, LEICKNESS CHISAMU · 2006 to 2016
$19.9M
CGH CDC HHS U2G GH001570NCHHSTP CDC HHS U2G PS000570PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRates of maternal mortality and morbidity vary markedly, both between and within countries. Documenting these variations, in a very unequal society like South Africa, provides useful information to direct initiatives to improve services. The study describes inequalities over time in access to maternal health services in South Africa, and identifies differences in maternal health outcomes between population groups and across geographical areas.

methodsData were analysed from serial population-level household surveys that applied multistage-stratified sampling. Access to maternal health services and health outcomes in 2008 (n = 1121) were compared with those in 2012 (n = 1648). Differences between socio-economic quartiles were quantified using the relative (RII) and slope (SII) index of inequality, based on survey weights.

resultsHigh levels of inequalities were noted in most measures of service access in both 2008 and 2012. Inequalities between socio-economic quartiles worsened over time in antenatal clinic attendance, with overall coverage falling from 97.0 to 90.2 %. Nationally, skilled birth attendance remained about 95 %, with persistent high inequalities (SII = 0.11, RII = 1.12 in 2012). In 2012, having a doctor present at childbirth was higher than in 2008 (34.4 % versus 27.8 %), but inequalities worsened. Countrywide, levels of planned pregnancy declined from 44.6 % in 2008 to 34.7 % in 2012. The RII and SII rose over this period and in 2012, only 22.4 % of the poorest quartile had a planned pregnancy. HIV testing increased substantially by 2012, though remains low in groups with a high HIV prevalence, such as women in rural formal areas, and from Gauteng and Mpumalanga provinces. Marked deficiencies in service access were noted in the Eastern Cape ad North West provinces.

conclusionsThough some population-level improvements occurred in access to services, inequalities generally worsened. Low levels of planned pregnancy, antenatal clinic access and having a doctor present at childbirth among poor women are of most concern. Policy makers should carefully balance efforts to increase service access nationally, against the need for programs targeting underserved populations.

Indexed as

Family CharacteristicsHealth Status DisparitiesAdolescentAdultFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaternal HealthMaternal Health ServicesMiddle AgedPregnancySocioeconomic FactorsSouth AfricaSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAccessEquity gapMaternal healthNational household surveyRelative inequalitiesSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID27581489
PMCPMC5007803

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.