Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33334329›Full record

Observational studyReproductive health2020

Why are the Pakistani maternal, fetal and newborn outcomes so poor compared to other low and middle-income countries?

Aleha Aziz, Sarah Saleem, Tracy L Nolen, Nousheen Akber Pradhan, Elizabeth M McClure, Saleem Jessani, Ana L Garces, Patricia L Hibberd, Janet L Moore, Shivaprasad S Goudar and 15 more

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Reproductive health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
17.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Why & where perinatal deaths: trends and determinants in Pakistan.Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  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

25 authors at 17 institutions in 7 countries.

Aleha AzizDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. aa4065@cumc.columbia.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2447-3438
Sarah SaleemAga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Tracy L NolenRTI International, Durham, NC, USA.
Nousheen Akber PradhanAga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Elizabeth M McClureRTI International, Durham, NC, USA.
Saleem JessaniAga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Ana L GarcesInstituto de Nutrición de Centroamérica y Panamá, Guatemala, Guatemala.
Patricia L HibberdSchool of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Janet L MooreRTI International, Durham, NC, USA.
Shivaprasad S GoudarJ N Medical College, KLE Academy Higher Education and Research, Belagavi, Karnataka, India.
Sangappa M DhadedJ N Medical College, KLE Academy Higher Education and Research, Belagavi, Karnataka, India.
Fabian EsamaiMoi University School of Medicine, Eldoret, Kenya.
Constance TengeMoi University School of Medicine, Eldoret, Kenya.
Archana B PatelLata Medical Research Foundation, Nagpur, India.
Elwyn ChombaUniversity Teaching Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia.
Musaku MwenechanyaUniversity Teaching Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia.
Carl L BoseUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Edward A LiechtyIndiana School of Medicine, University of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Nancy F KrebsUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO, USA.
Richard J DermanThomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Waldemar A CarloUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Antoinette TshefuKinshasa School of Public Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Marion Koso-ThomasEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Sameen SiddiqiAga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Robert L GoldenbergDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Aga Khan University · PKRTI International · USKLE University · INMoi University · KEUniversity Teaching Hospital · ZMBoston University · USColumbia University · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USInstitute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama · GTLata Medical Research Foundation · INMinistry of Public Health · CDThomas Jefferson University · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

The University of North Carolina-Kinshasa School of Public Health Research Partnership in the Democratic Republic of Congo; a Model for Improving Women'sand Children's Health Through ResearchUG1HD076465 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MELISSA SCHWEIKHART BAUSERMAN · 2018 to 2026
$5.6M
Boston University/Lata Medical Research Foundation Global Network for Women's Children's Health Research UnitUG1HD078439 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI Patricia L Hibberd · 2018 to 2026
$5.5M
Nutrition-specific interventions to improve long-term maternal-child health outcomesUG1HD076474 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Edwin Jose Asturias, NANCY F KREBS · 2018 to 2026
$5.4M
Columbia University/Aga Khan University Global Network Research UnitUG1HD078438 · NICHD · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ROBERT L GOLDENBERG · 2018 to 2026
$5.1M
Global Network for Women's and Children's Health ResearchUG1HD076461 · NICHD · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI BUCHER, SHERRI LYNN, SZYLD, EDGARDO GABRIEL · 2018 to 2023
$3.2M
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development UG1HD078438NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD076461NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD076465NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD076474NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD078438NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD078439
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPakistan has among the poorest pregnancy outcomes worldwide, significantly worse than many other low-resource countries. The reasons for these differences are not clear. In this study, we compared pregnancy outcomes in Pakistan to other low-resource countries and explored factors that might help explain these differences.

methodsThe Global Network (GN) Maternal Newborn Health Registry (MNHR) is a prospective, population-based observational study that includes all pregnant women and their pregnancy outcomes in defined geographic communities in six low-middle income countries (India, Pakistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guatemala, Kenya, Zambia). Study staff enroll women in early pregnancy and follow-up soon after delivery and at 42 days to ascertain delivery, neonatal, and maternal outcomes. We analyzed the maternal mortality ratios (MMR), neonatal mortality rates (NMR), stillbirth rates, and potential explanatory factors from 2010 to 2018 across the GN sites.

resultsFrom 2010 to 2018, there were 91,076 births in Pakistan and 456,276 births in the other GN sites combined. The MMR in Pakistan was 319 per 100,000 live births compared to an average of 124 in the other sites, while the Pakistan NMR was 49.4 per 1,000 live births compared to 20.4 in the other sites. The stillbirth rate in Pakistan was 53.5 per 1000 births compared to 23.2 for the other sites. Preterm birth and low birthweight rates were also substantially higher than the other sites combined. Within weight ranges, the Pakistani site generally had significantly higher rates of stillbirth and neonatal mortality than the other sites combined, with differences increasing as birthweights increased. By nearly every measure, medical care for pregnant women and their newborns in the Pakistan sites was worse than at the other sites combined.

conclusionThe Pakistani pregnancy outcomes are much worse than those in the other GN sites. Reasons for these poorer outcomes likely include that the Pakistani sites' reproductive-aged women are largely poorly educated, undernourished, anemic, and deliver a high percentage of preterm and low-birthweight babies in settings of often inadequate maternal and newborn care. By addressing the issues highlighted in this paper there appears to be substantial room for improvements in Pakistan's pregnancy outcomes.

Indexed as

AdultDeveloping CountriesFemaleHumansInfantInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornMaternal MortalityPakistanPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePremature BirthProspective StudiesStillbirthGlobal networkMaternal mortalityNeonatal mortalityPakistanPregnancy outcomesRisk factorsStillbirth

Identifiers

PMID33334329
PMCPMC7745345
OpenAlexW3113115983

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.