Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33187962›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2020

Temporal trends in coverage, quality and equity of maternal and child health services in Rwanda, 2000-2015.

Celestin Hategeka, Catherine Arsenault, Margaret E Kruk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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
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

3 authors.

Celestin HategekaDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA chategeka@hsph.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7808-4652
Catherine ArsenaultDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Margaret E KrukDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAchieving the maternal and child health (MCH)-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) will require equitable and effective (quality-adjusted) coverage of recommended health interventions in low- and middle-income countries. We assessed effective coverage and equity of MCH services in Rwanda in the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) era to help guide policy decisions to improve equitable health gains in the SDG era and beyond.

methodsUsing four rounds of Rwanda demographic and health surveys conducted from 2000 to 2015, we identified coverage and quality indicators for five MCH services: antenatal care (ANC), delivery care, and care for child diarrhoea, suspected pneumonia and fever. We calculated crude coverage and quality in each survey and used these to estimate effective coverage. The effective coverage should be regarded as an upper bound because there were few available quality measures. We also described equity in effective coverage of these five MCH services over time across the wealth index, area of residence and maternal education using equiplots.

resultsA total of 48 910 women aged 15-49 years and 33 429 children under 5 years were included across the four survey rounds. In 2015, average effective coverage was 33.2% (range 19.9%-44.2%) across all five MCH services, 30.1% (range 19.9%-40.2%) for maternal health services (average of ANC and delivery) and 35.3% (range 27.3%-44.2%) for sick child care (diarrhoea, pneumonia and fever). This is in contrast to crude coverage which averaged 56.5% (range 43.6%-90.7%) across all five MCH services, 67.3% (range 43.9%-90.7%) for maternal health services and 49.2% (range 43.6%-53.9%) for sick child care. Between 2010 and 2015 effective coverage increased by 154.2% (range 127.3%-170.0%) for maternal health services and by 27.4% (range 4.2%-79.6%) for sick child care. These increases were associated with widening socioeconomic inequalities in effective coverage for maternal health services, and narrowing inequalities in effective coverage for sick child care.

conclusionWhile effective coverage of common MCH services generally improved in the MDG era, it still lagged substantially behind crude coverage for the same services due to low-quality care. Overall, effective coverage of MCH services remained suboptimal and inequitable. Policies should focus on improving effective coverage of these services and reducing inequities.

Indexed as

Maternal-Child Health ServicesMaternal Health ServicesChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansPregnancyPrenatal CareRwandaSocioeconomic Factorschild healthdescriptive studymaternal health

Identifiers

PMID33187962
PMCPMC7668303

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.