ArticleBMC health services research2020
Evaluating process fidelity during the implementation of Group Antenatal Care in Mexico.
Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Group antenatal care positively transforms the care experience: Results of an effectiveness trial in Malawi.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Utilizing a mixed-methods approach to assess implementation fidelity of a group antenatal care trial in Rwanda.PloS one · 2023Trial
- Provider Perspectives on Group PrEP Care for Sex Workers: A Pre-implementation Study in a U.S. Midwestern Community Health Center.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Article
- Qualitative evaluation of a package of implementation strategies codesigned to support the introduction of multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) for pregnant women in Bamako, Mali.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCenteringPregnancy (CP) is a group antenatal care (G-ANC) model that has proven beneficial for mothers and their newborns. We conducted a feasibility study beginning in 2016 as part of the Mexican effort to implement G-ANC locally. This study reports on fidelity to the essential elements of CP during its implementation in Mexico.
methodsWe collected prospective data using a standardized checklist at four primary-care centers that implemented our adapted G-ANC model. We performed a descriptive analysis of fidelity to 28 processes per G-ANC session (71 sessions made up of 10 groups and 129 women across 4 health centers). We calculated fidelity to each process as a proportion with 95% confidence intervals. We present overall results and stratified by health center and by facilitation team.
resultsOverall fidelity to the G-ANC intervention was 82%, with variability by health center (78-88%). The elements with the highest fidelity were having space for activities such as checking vital signs, conversation in a circle, and medical check-ups (100% each) and the element with the lowest fidelity was using music to enhance privacy (27.3%). Fidelity was not significantly different by center.
conclusionsOur study suggests good model fidelity during the implementation of G-ANC in Mexico. Our findings also contribute useful information about where to focus efforts in the future to maintain and improve G-ANC model fidelity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.