Group Prenatal Care Compared With Traditional Prenatal Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Social Capital and Cultural Health Capital in Primary Care: The Case of Group Medical Visits.Sociology of health & illness · 2025
   Article
2. Effects of March of Dimes Supportive Pregnancy Care on Maternal and Infant Health Across Diverse Patient Populations: a Quasi-Experimental Multi-Site Pilot Study.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2020
   Article
3. Group Medical Visits and Clinician Wellbeing.Global advances in health and medicine · 2020
   Article
4. The Nutritional Behaviour of Pregnant Women in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  In Reply.2017
• Comment on
  Group Prenatal Care Compared With Traditional Prenatal Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.2016

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as