Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30097022›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018

Systematic review of community participation interventions to improve maternal health outcomes in rural South Asia.

Binod Bindu Sharma, Lisa Jones, Deborah Joanne Loxton, Debbie Booth, Roger Smith

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Binod Bindu SharmaMothers and Babies Research Centre, Hunter Medical Research Institute, Lookout Rd, New Lambton Heights, NSW, 2305, Australia. BinodBindu.Sharma@uon.edu.au.
Lisa JonesDepartment of Neonatology, John Hunter Hospital, Lookout Rd, New Lambton Heights, NSW, 2305, Australia.
Deborah Joanne LoxtonPriority Research Centre for Generational Health and Ageing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Debbie BoothThe University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Roger SmithMothers and Babies Research Centre, Hunter Medical Research Institute, Lot 1 Kookaburra Circuit, New Lambton Heights, NSW, 2305, Australia.
University of Newcastle Australia · AUHunter Medical Research Institute · AUUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is a systematic review on the effectiveness of community interventions in improving maternal health care outcomes in South Asia.

methodsWe searched electronic databases to June 2017. Randomised or cluster randomised studies in communities within rural/remote areas of Nepal, Bangladesh, India and Pakistan were included. Data were analysed as risk ratios (RR) or odds ratios (OR), and effects were adjusted for clustering. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects and evidence quality was assessed.

resultsEleven randomised trials were included from 5440 citations. Meta-analysis of all community interventions combined compared with control showed a small improvement in the number of women attending at least one antenatal care visit (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.33). Two community mobilisation sub groups: home care using both male and female mobilisers, and education by community mobilisers, improved the number of women attending at least one antenatal visit. There was no difference in the number of women attending at least one antenatal visit for any other subgroup. There was no difference in the number of women attending 3 or more antenatal visits for all community interventions combined, or any community subgroup. Likewise, there was no difference in attendance at birth between all community interventions combined and control. Health care facility births were modestly increased in women's education groups (adjusted RR (1.15, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.20; 2 studies)). Risk of maternal deaths after 2 years (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.64; 5 studies), and 3 years (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.52 to 2.36; 2 studies), were no different between women's education groups and control. Community level mobilisation rather than health care messages at district level improved the numbers of women giving birth at health care facilities (RR1.09 (95%CI 1.06 to 1.13; 1 study)). Maternal health care knowledge scores improved in two community-based interventions, one involving education of male community members.

conclusionWomen's education interventions may improve the number of women seeking birth at a health care facility, but the evidence is of low quality. No impact on maternal mortality was observed Future research should explore the effectiveness of including male mobilisers.

trial registrationThis systematic review is registered with PROSPERO CRD42016033201 .

Indexed as

Community ParticipationHealth EducationMaternal HealthRural PopulationBangladeshFemaleHealth FacilitiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHome ChildbirthHumansIndiaMaternal DeathMaternal Health ServicesNepalOdds RatioOutcome Assessment, Health CareAntenatal careCommunityDeliveryMaternal deathNetworksPregnancyPregnancy complicationsRural

Identifiers

PMID30097022
PMCPMC6086057
OpenAlexW2887568578

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.