Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31023748›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Developing measures for WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience: a conceptual framework and scoping review.

Samantha R Lattof, Özge Tunçalp, Allisyn C Moran, Maurice Bucagu, Doris Chou, Theresa Diaz, Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.1field-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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Exploring Women's Perceived Quality of Antenatal Care: A Cross-Sectional Study in The Netherlands.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Samantha R LattofDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0934-1488
Özge TunçalpDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Allisyn C MoranDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Maurice BucaguDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Doris ChouDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Theresa DiazDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Ahmet Metin GülmezogluDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
World Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn response to the newest WHO recommendations on routine antenatal care (ANC) for pregnant women and adolescent girls, this paper identifies the literature on existing ANC measures, presents a conceptual framework for quality ANC, maps existing measures to specific WHO recommendations, identifies gaps where new measures are needed to monitor the implementation and impact of routine ANC and prioritises measures for capture.

methodsWe conducted searches in four databases and five websites. Searches and application of inclusion/exclusion criteria followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow approach for scoping reviews. Data were extracted on measure information, methodology, methodological work and implementation. We adapted and refined a conceptual framework for routine ANC based on these measures.

resultsThis scoping review uncovered 58 resources describing 46 existing measures that align with WHO recommendations and good clinical practices for ANC. Of the 42 WHO-recommended ANC interventions and four good clinical practices included in this scoping review, only 14 WHO-recommended interventions and three established good clinical practices could potentially be measured immediately using existing measures. Recommendations addressing the integration of ANC with allied fields are likelier to have existing measures than recommendations that focus on maternal health. When mapped to our conceptual framework, existing measures prioritise content of care and health systems; measures for girls' and women's experiences of care are notably lacking. Available data sources for non-existent measures are currently limited.

conclusionOur research updates prior efforts to develop comprehensive measures of quality ANC and raises awareness of the need to better assess experiences of ANC. Given the inadequate number and distribution of existing ANC measures across the quality of care conceptual framework domains, new standardised measures are required to assess quality of routine ANC. Girls' and women's voices deserve greater acknowledgement when measuring the quality and delivery of ANC.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnancy in AdolescencePrenatal CareProof of Concept StudyQuality of Health CareWorld Health Organizationobstetricspublic healthquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID31023748
PMCPMC6502222
OpenAlexW2940925622

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.