Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30808325›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2019

Applicability of the WHO maternal near miss tool in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.

Abera Kenay Tura, To Lam Trang, Thomas van den Akker, Jos van Roosmalen, Sicco Scherjon, Joost Zwart, Jelle Stekelenburg

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Examining maternal morbidity across a spectrum of delivery locations: An analysis of the Global Network's Maternal and Neonatal Health Registry.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2023
    Article
  18. Observational
  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

7 authors.

Abera Kenay TuraSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, College of Health and Medical Sciences, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia. a.k.tura@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2735-7523
To Lam TrangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Leeuwarden Medical Center, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Thomas van den AkkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Jos van RoosmalenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Sicco ScherjonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, P.O.B, 30 001, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Joost ZwartDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Deventer Ziekenhuis, Deventer, The Netherlands.
Jelle StekelenburgDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Leeuwarden Medical Center, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApplicability of the World Health Organization (WHO) maternal near miss criteria in low-income settings is not systematically addressed in the literature. The objective of this review was to determine the applicability of the WHO maternal near miss tool in sub-Saharan Africa.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Popline, CINAHL, AJOL, and Google scholar using key words for maternal near miss and sub-Saharan Africa. Studies which applied the WHO maternal near miss criteria, containing clear definitions, and published between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2017 were included. Two authors independently extracted data. Quantitative analysis and narrative synthesis were conducted, and medians with interquartile range (IQR) were calculated for summarizing the findings. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Estabrook's quality assessment and validity tool.

resultsFifteen studies from nine countries comprising 227,077 participants were included. Median maternal near miss ratio was 24.2 (IQR: 12.4-35.8) per 1000 live births ranging from 4.4 in a population-based study in South Africa to 198 in a rural private hospital in Nigeria. Eight studies reported challenges in implementing the WHO maternal near miss tool, especially related to the threshold for blood transfusion, and availability of several laboratory-based criteria. In three studies, local adaptations were made.

conclusionThis review showed that the WHO maternal near miss tool is not uniformly applied in sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore, a common adaptation for the region is required to increase its applicability.

Indexed as

Maternal MortalityAfrica South of the SaharaFemaleHumansMaternal Health ServicesNear Miss, HealthcarePregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsQuality Assurance, Health CareWorld Health OrganizationMaternal near missSevere acute maternal morbiditySevere maternal outcomesSub-Saharan AfricaSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30808325
PMCPMC6390325

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.