Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29386917›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of women's health2018

Women's perspectives on quality of maternal health care services in Malawi.

Kennedy Machira, Martin Palamuleni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of women's health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Predictors of Utilisation of Skilled Maternal Healthcare in Lilongwe District, Malawi.International journal of health policy and management · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Factors associated with the utilization of postnatal care services among Malawian women.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2019
    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

2 authors.

Kennedy MachiraDepartment of Agriculture Economics, Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Martin PalamuleniPopulation and Research Unit, North West University, Mmabatho, Republic of South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite promotion by many stakeholders to improve maternal health outcome in many developing countries including Malawi, many analysts agree that the utmost success in maternal health will arise if maternal health care services are an unparallel led source for women's health care solutions for any problem related to childbirth. Health advocates worldwide claim that even though maternal services are provided, women's utilization of such services has not been ascertained. The objective of this study was to explore women's perspectives on the quality of health care service delivery in Malawi. This article therefore investigates women's perspectives on the quality of maternal health care services in Malawi. We used six focus group discussions in six health facilities that were selected across Malawi. We found that erratic availability of medical resources and unethical practices among health workers adversely affected quality of maternal health care service delivery. We concluded that the expensive routine operational audits of medical resources and service delivery across health facilities are imperative if women's health outcomes are to be enhanced in Malawi.

Indexed as

accesshealth careMalawipublic healthquality of carewomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID29386917
PMCPMC5765969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.