Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30779108›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2019

Women's experience with group prenatal care in a rural community in northern Nigeria.

Sunday E Adaji, Adenike Jimoh, Umma Bawa, Habiba I Ibrahim, Abiola A Olorukooba, Hamdalla Adelaiye, Comfort Garba, Anita Lukong, Suleiman Idris, Oladapo S Shittu

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

10 authors.

Sunday E AdajiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Adenike JimohCollege of Health Science, Bingham University, Jos, Nigeria.
Umma BawaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Habiba I IbrahimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Abiola A OlorukoobaDepartment of Paediatrics, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Hamdalla AdelaiyeDepartment of Paediatrics, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Comfort GarbaCBS Research Group, PRHI, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Anita LukongDepartment of Nursing Sciences, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Suleiman IdrisDepartment of Community Medicine, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Oladapo S ShittuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.

Funding

UC Berkeley Global Research Training in Population and Health in NigeriaD43TW007696 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI POTTS, DAVID MALCOLM · 2006 to 2010
$678k
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW007696Population CouncilUC Berkeley Global Research Training in Population and Health in Nigeria
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess women's experience of group prenatal care in a rural Nigerian community.

methodsIn an observational study, consenting pregnant women were enrolled in a group prenatal care program based on the CenteringPregnancy model from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2011, in Tsibiri, Nigeria. Women were interviewed before joining the group and postnatally. A predesigned pro forma was used to assess group behavior during sessions. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied to data.

resultsIn total, 161 women enrolled, and 54 of 72 scheduled prenatal sessions took place. The average number of visits was three per woman, with good group interaction and cohesion. Mothers who could mention at least five out of eight danger signs of pregnancy increased from 1.4% (2) to 13.3% (14) (P<0.001, 95% CI 4.28-19.52), while mean knowledge score for danger signs increased from 31% to 47.8% (P<0.001, 95% CI 0.86-2.16). Commitment to birth preparedness plans was impressive. The mothers enjoyed the group sessions and shared the lessons they learned with others.

conclusionGroup prenatal care was feasible and acceptable to women in the present study setting. Comparative trials would be helpful to demonstrate the benefits of the tested model in low-income settings.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansNigeriaPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnant PeoplePrenatal CareRural PopulationGroup prenatal careMaternal healthNigeriaRural communityWomen's experience

Identifiers

PMID30779108
PMCPMC6449218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.