Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33550253›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Women's well-being and functioning after evidence-based antenatal care: a protocol for a systematic review of intervention studies.

Carla Betina Andreucci, Veronique Filippi, Jose Guilherme Cecatti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Carla Betina AndreucciDepartment of Medicine, Federal University of Sao Carlos, Sao Carlos, Brazil carlapolido@ufscar.br.ORCID 0000-0002-5590-108X
Veronique FilippiDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jose Guilherme CecattiSchool of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1285-8445

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe 2016 WHO antenatal guidelines propose evidence-based recommendations to improve maternal outcomes. We aim to complement these recommendations by describing and estimating the effects of the interventions recommended by WHO on maternal well-being or functioning. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies evaluating women's well-being or functioning following the implementation of evidence-based antenatal interventions, published in peer-reviewed journals through a 15-year interval (2005-2020). The lead reviewer will screen all records identified at MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, LILACS and SciELO. Two other reviewers will control screening strategy quality. Quality and risk of bias will be assessed using a specially designed instrument. Data synthesis will consider the instruments applied, how often they were used, conditions/interventions for positive or negative effects documented, statistical measures used to document effectiveness and how results were presented. A random-effects meta-analysis comparing frequently used instruments may be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be a systematic review with no human beings' involvement, therefore not requiring ethical approval. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and scientific events. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019143436.

Indexed as

Prenatal CareResearch DesignBiasFemaleHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicPregnancySystematic Reviews as Topicobstetricspublic healthreproductive medicine

Identifiers

PMID33550253
PMCPMC7925906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.