Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31543985›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2019

Equitable coverage? The roles of the private and public sectors in providing maternal, newborn and child health interventions in South Asia.

Sufang Guo, Liliana Carvajal-Aguirre, Cesar G Victora, Aluisio J D Barros, Fernando C Wehrmeister, Luis Paulo Vidaletti, Gagan Gupta, Md Ziaul Matin, Paul Rutter

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Reorienting health systems towards Primary Health Care in South Asia.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Global health action · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 7 countries.

Sufang GuoUNICEF Regional Office for South Asia, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Liliana Carvajal-AguirreUNICEF, New York, New York, USA.
Cesar G VictoraInternational Center for Equity in Health, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2465-2180
Aluisio J D BarrosInternational Center for Equity in Health, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2022-8729
Fernando C WehrmeisterInternational Center for Equity in Health, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7137-1747
Luis Paulo VidalettiInternational Center for Equity in Health, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2840-6841
Gagan GuptaUNICEF India, United Nations Childrens Fund, New Delhi, India.
Md Ziaul MatinUNICEF Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Paul RutterUNICEF Regional Office for South Asia, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Universidade Federal de Pelotas · BRUNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office · THUnited Nations Children's Fund · USUnited Nations Children's Fund India · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe private sector accounts for an important share of health services available in South Asia. It is not known to what extent socioeconomic and urban-rural inequalities in maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) interventions are being affected by the presence of private providers.

methodsNationally representative surveys carried out from 2009 to 2015 were analysed for seven of the eight countries in South Asia, as data for Sri Lanka were not available. The outcomes studied included antenatal care (four or more visits), institutional delivery, early initiation of breast feeding, postnatal care for babies, and careseeking for diarrhoea and pneumonia. Results were stratified according to quintiles of household wealth and urban-rural residence.

resultsAt regional level, the public sector played a larger role than the private sector in providing antenatal (24.8% vs 15.6% coverage), delivery (51.9% vs 26.8%) and postnatal care (15.7% vs 8.2%), as well as in the early initiation of breast feeding (26.1% vs 11.1%). The reverse was observed in careseeking for diarrhoea (15.0% and 46.2%) and pneumonia (18.2% and 50.5%). In 28 out of 37 possible analyses of coverage by country, socioeconomic inequalities were significantly wider in the private than in the public sector, and in only four cases the reverse pattern was observed. In 20 of the 37 analyses, the public sector was also more likely to be used by the wealthiest women and children.

conclusionThe private sector plays a substantial role in delivering MNCH interventions in South Asia but is more inequitable than the public sector.

Indexed as

Asiahealth equityhealth status disparitiesmaternal–child health servicessocioeconomic factors

Identifiers

PMID31543985
PMCPMC6730586
OpenAlexW2969566971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.