Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31303295›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Global health2019

Does facility birth reduce maternal and perinatal mortality in Brong Ahafo, Ghana? A secondary analysis using data on 119 244 pregnancies from two cluster-randomised controlled trials.

Sabine Gabrysch, Robin C Nesbitt, Anja Schoeps, Lisa Hurt, Seyi Soremekun, Karen Edmond, Alexander Manu, Terhi J Lohela, Samuel Danso, Keith Tomlin and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
24.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Response: Perinatal mortality in eastern Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Sabine GabryschHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Research Department 2, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam, Germany; Institute of Public Health, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: sabine.gabrysch@uni-heidelberg.de.
Robin C NesbittHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Anja SchoepsHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Lisa HurtFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.
Seyi SoremekunFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore.
Karen EdmondFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Alexander ManuFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Kintampo Health Research Centre, Kintampo, Ghana; Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Terhi J LohelaHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Public Health, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Samuel DansoKintampo Health Research Centre, Kintampo, Ghana; University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh, UK.
Keith TomlinFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Betty KirkwoodFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Oona M R CampbellFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBHeidelberg University · DEKing's College London · GBLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBObservational & Pragmatic Research Institute · SGUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DEUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaternal and perinatal mortality are still unacceptably high in many countries despite steep increases in facility birth. The evidence that childbirth in facilities reduces mortality is weak, mainly because of the scarcity of robust study designs and data. We aimed to assess this link by quantifying the influence of major determinants of facility birth (cluster-level facility birth, wealth, education, and distance to childbirth care) on several mortality outcomes, while also considering quality of care.

methodsOur study is a secondary analysis of surveillance data on 119 244 pregnancies from two large population-based cluster-randomised controlled trials in Brong Ahafo, Ghana. In addition, we specifically collected data to assess quality of care at all 64 childbirth facilities in the study area. Outcomes were direct maternal mortality, perinatal mortality, first-day and early neonatal mortality, and antepartum and intrapartum stillbirth. We calculated cluster-level facility birth as the percentage of facility births in a woman's village over the preceding 2 years, and we computed distances from women's regular residence to health facilities in a geospatial database. Associations between determinants of facility birth and mortality outcomes were assessed in crude and multivariable multilevel logistic regression models. We stratified perinatal mortality effects by three policy periods, using April 1, 2005, and July 1, 2008, as cutoff points, when delivery-fee exemption and free health insurance were introduced in Ghana. These policies increased facility birth and potentially reduced quality of care.

findingsHigher proportions of facility births in a cluster were not linked to reductions in any of the mortality outcomes. In women who were wealthier, facility births were much more common than in those who were poorer, but mortality was not lower among them or their babies. Women with higher education had lower mortality risks than less-educated women, except first-day and early neonatal mortality. A substantially higher proportion of women living in areas closer to childbirth facilities had facility births and caesarean sections than women living further from childbirth facilities, but mortality risks were not lower despite this increased service use. Among women who lived in areas closer to facilities offering comprehensive emergency obstetric care (CEmOC), emergency newborn care, or high-quality routine care, or to facilities that had providers with satisfactory competence, we found a lower risk of intrapartum stillbirth (14·2 per 1000 deliveries at >20 km from a CEmOC facility vs 10·4 per 1000 deliveries at ≤1 km; odds ratio [OR] 1·13, 95% CI 1·06-1·21) and of composite mortality outcomes than among women living in areas where these services were further away. Protective effects of facility birth were restricted to the two earlier policy periods (from June 1, 2003, to June 30, 2008), whereas there was evidence for higher perinatal mortality with increasing wealth (OR 1·09, 1·03-1·14) and lower perinatal mortality with increasing distance from childbirth facilities (OR 0·93, 0·89-0·98) after free health insurance was introduced in July 1, 2008.

interpretationFacility birth does not necessarily convey a survival benefit for women or babies and should only be recommended in facilities capable of providing emergency obstetric and newborn care and capable of safe-guarding uncomplicated births.

fundingThe Baden-Württemberg Foundation, the Daimler and Benz Foundation, the European Social Fund and Ministry of Science, Research, and the Arts Baden-Württemberg, WHO, US Agency for International Development, Save the Children, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the UK Department for International Development.

Indexed as

Delivery, ObstetricHealth FacilitiesMaternal MortalityPerinatal MortalityAdolescentAdultFemaleGhanaHumansInfant, NewbornMiddle AgedPopulation SurveillancePregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31303295
PMCPMC6639244
OpenAlexW2956691829

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.