Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32442234›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Evaluation of a health promotion intervention associated with birthing centres in rural Nepal.

Preeti Mahato, Edwin van Teijlingen, Padam Simkhada, Catherine Angell, Vanora Hundley

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Preeti MahatoCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1166-8463
Edwin van TeijlingenCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.
Padam SimkhadaManmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Nepal.
Catherine AngellCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.
Vanora HundleyCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3578-4135
Bournemouth University · GBPokhara University · NPUniversity of Huddersfield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBirthing centres (BC) in Nepal are mostly situated in rural areas and provide care for women without complications. However, they are often bypassed by women and their role in providing good quality maternity services is overlooked. This study evaluated an intervention to increase access and utilisation of perinatal care facilities in community settings.

methodsThis longitudinal cross-sectional study was conducted over five years in four villages in Nepal and included two BCs. An intervention was conducted in 2014-2016 that involved supporting the BCs and conducting a health promotion programme with local women. Population-based multi-stage sampling of women of reproductive age with a child below 24 months of age was undertaken. Household surveys were conducted (2012 and 2017) employing trained enumerators and using a structured validated questionnaire. The collected data were entered into SPSS and analysed comparing pre- and post-intervention surveys.

resultsThe intervention was associated with an increase in uptake in facility birth, with an increase in utilisation of perinatal services available from BCs. The post-intervention survey provided evidence that women were more likely to give birth at primary care facilities (OR 5.60, p-value <0.001) than prior to the intervention. Similarly, the likelihood of giving birth at a health facility increased if decision for birthplace was made jointly by women and family members for primary care facilities (OR 1.76, p-value 0.023) and hospitals/tertiary care facilities (OR 1.78, p-value 0.020. If women had less than four ANC visits, then they were less likely to give birth at primary care facilities (OR 0.39, p-value <0.001) or hospitals/tertiary care facilities (OR 0.63, p-value 0.014). Finally, women were less likely to give birth at primary care facilities if they had only primary level of education (OR 0.49, p-value 0.014).

conclusionBCs have the potential to increase the births at health facilities and decrease home births if their services are promoted by the local health promoters. In addition, socio-economic factors including women's education, the level of women's autonomy and having four or more ANC visits affect the utilisation of perinatal services at the health facility.

Indexed as

Health PromotionAdultAttitude to HealthBirthing CentersCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHome ChildbirthHumansInfant, NewbornLongitudinal StudiesMidwiferyNepalPregnancyPrenatal Care

Identifiers

PMID32442234
PMCPMC7244127
OpenAlexW3028312228

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.