Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28854886›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2017

Factors affecting effective community participation in maternal and newborn health programme planning, implementation and quality of care interventions.

Lisa Howard-Grabman, Andrea Solnes Miltenburg, Cicely Marston, Anayda Portela

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Lisa Howard-GrabmanTraining Resources Group, Inc., 4301 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 400, Arlington, VA, 22203, USA. lhowardg@trg-inc.com.
Andrea Solnes MiltenburgInstitute of Health and Society, Department of Community Medicine and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1072 Blindern, 0316, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4681-7043
Cicely MarstonFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Anayda PortelaWorld Health Organization Department of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBTechnical Resource Group (United States) · USUniversity of Oslo · NOWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunity participation in in health programme planning, implementation and quality improvement was recently recommended in guidelines to improve use of skilled care during pregnancy, childbirth and the postnatal period for women and newborns. How to implement community participation effectively remains unclear. In this article we explore different factors.

methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis, using the Supporting the Use of Research Evidence framework, of effectiveness studies identified through systematic literature reviews of two community participation interventions; quality improvement of maternity care services; and maternal and newborn health programme planning and implementation.

resultsCommunity participation ranged from outreach educational activities to communities being full partners in decision-making. In general, implementation considerations were underreported. Key facilitators of community participation included supportive policy and funding environments where communities see women's health as a collective responsibility; linkages with a functioning health system e.g. via stakeholder committees; intercultural sensitivity; and a focus on interventions to strengthen community capacity to support health. Levels of participation and participatory approaches often changed over the life of programmes as community and health services capacity to interact developed.

conclusionImplementation requires careful consideration of the context: previous experience with participation, who will be involved, gender norms, and the timeframe for implementation. Relevant stakeholders must be actively involved, particularly those often excluded from decision making. Current limited evidence suggests that the vision of community participation as a process and the presence of a focus to strengthen community capacity to participate and to improve health may be a key factor for long term success.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationProgram DevelopmentAdultFemaleHealth Plan ImplementationHumansInfant, NewbornMaternal Health ServicesPregnancyQuality ImprovementWomen's HealthCommunity participationHealth programme planning and implementationMaternal and newborn healthQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID28854886
PMCPMC5577661
OpenAlexW2745825202

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.