Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32817688›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Inferring antenatal care visit timing in low- and middle-income countries: Methods to inform potential maternal vaccine coverage.

Ranju Baral, Jessica Fleming, Sadaf Khan, Deborah Higgins, Nathaniel Hendrix, Clint Pecenka

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. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A Financial and Global Demand Analysis to Inform Decisions for Funding and Clinical Development of Group B Streptococcus Vaccines for Pregnant Women.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022
    Article
  14. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ranju BaralPATH, Seattle, WA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3043-6070
Jessica FlemingPATH, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Sadaf KhanPATH, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Deborah HigginsPATH, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Nathaniel HendrixThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Clint PecenkaPATH, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Program for Appropriate Technology in Health · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe timing of antenatal care (ANC) visits directly affect health intervention coverage and impact, especially for those interventions requiring strict gestational age windows for administration, such as maternal respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine. Existing nationally representative population-based surveys do not record the timing of ANC visits beyond the first, limiting the availability of reliable data around timing of subsequent ANC visits in most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Here, we describe a model that estimates the timing of ANC visits by gestational age using publicly available multi-country survey data. METHODS AND

findingsWe used the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) data from 69 LMICs. We used several factors to estimate the timing of subsequent ANC visits by gestation age: the timing of the first ANC visit (ANC1) in a given pregnancy, derived from the DHS; the country's reported average ANC coverage at each ANC visit (ANC1 through the fourth ANC visit [ANC4]); and the World Health Organization's guidance on recommended ANC visit. We then used the timing of ANC visit by gestation age to predict the coverage of a potential maternal RSV vaccine administered at 24-36 weeks of gestation. We calculated the maternal immunization coverage by summing the number of eligible women vaccinated at any ANC visit divided by the total number of pregnant women. We find, in general, countries with higher ANC1 coverage were predicted to have higher vaccination coverage. In 82% of countries, the modeled vaccine coverage is less than ANC4 coverage.

conclusionsThe methods illustrated in this paper have implications on the precision of estimating impact and programmatic feasibility of time-critical interventions, especially for pregnant women. The methods can be easily adapted to vaccine demand forecasts models, vaccine impact assessments, and cost-effectiveness analyses and can be adapted to other maternal interventions that have administration timing restrictions.

Indexed as

Gestational AgeAdultDeveloping CountriesFemaleHealth SurveysHumansPovertyPregnancyPrenatal CareRespiratory Syncytial VirusesRespiratory Syncytial Virus InfectionsViral VaccinesViral Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID32817688
PMCPMC7446781
OpenAlexW3080229720

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.