Observational studyBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021
Barriers and enablers to routine register data collection for newborns and mothers: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.
Observational study in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design and content of health facility routine data recording and reporting forms for maternal, newborn, and child health: a scoping review of literature.JAMIA open · 2026Review
- Stillbirth and newborn data quality and use and related input and process factors: findings of the IMPULSE study in Uganda.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Partial pictures: what routine health data can and cannot tell us about the quality of maternal and neonatal health services in Tanzania.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Availability and the quality of key newborn data within routine health facility data: findings of the IMPULSE observational study in the Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Uganda.Journal of global health · 2025Observational
- Negligence in data recording during institutional birth: exploring health workers' perspectives on the barriers and enablers of data documentation practices.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Article
- Surgical indicators for obstetrics and family planning in routine health information systems: a landscape analysis.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Measuring ENAP interventions for small and/or sick newborns in routine health information systems: indicators and considerations from a WHO expert consultation.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Facilitator and Barrier to Health Information System Use from Health Professionals Perspective: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- Travelling numbers and broken loops: A qualitative systematic review on collecting and reporting maternal and neonatal health data in low-and lower-middle income countries.SSM - population health · 2024Review
- Effect of Performance-Based Nonfinancial Incentives on Data Quality in Individual Medical Records of Institutional Births: Quasi-Experimental Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- How and why does mode of birth affect processes for routine data collection and use? A qualitative study in Bangladesh and Tanzania.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Quality of reporting and trends of emergency obstetric and neonatal care indicators: an analysis from Tanzania district health information system data between 2016 and 2020.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Feasibility, usability and acceptability of a novel digital hybrid-system for reporting of routine maternal health information in Southern Tanzania: A mixed-methods study.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Understanding maternity care providers' use of data in Southern Tanzania.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Routine use of DHIS2 data: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Article
- Measuring coverage and quality of supportive care for inpatient neonatal infections: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.Journal of global health · 2022Article
- Is aggregated surveillance data a reliable method for constructing tuberculosis care cascades? A secondary data analysis from Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Birthweight: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolicymakers need regular high-quality coverage data on care around the time of birth to accelerate progress for ending preventable maternal and newborn deaths and stillbirths. With increasing facility births, routine Health Management Information System (HMIS) data have potential to track coverage. Identifying barriers and enablers faced by frontline health workers recording HMIS source data in registers is important to improve data for use.
methodsThe EN-BIRTH study was a mixed-methods observational study in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania to assess measurement validity for selected Every Newborn coverage indicators. We described data elements required in labour ward registers to track these indicators. To evaluate barriers and enablers for correct recording of data in registers, we designed three interview tools: a) semi-structured in-depth interview (IDI) guide b) semi-structured focus group discussion (FGD) guide, and c) checklist assessing care-to-documentation. We interviewed two groups of respondents (January 2018-March 2019): hospital nurse-midwives and doctors who fill ward registers after birth (n = 40 IDI and n = 5 FGD); and data collectors (n = 65). Qualitative data were analysed thematically by categorising pre-identified codes. Common emerging themes of barriers or enablers across all five hospitals were identified relating to three conceptual framework categories.
resultsSimilar themes emerged as both barriers and enablers. First, register design was recognised as crucial, yet perceived as complex, and not always standardised for necessary data elements. Second, register filling was performed by over-stretched nurse-midwives with variable training, limited supervision, and availability of logistical resources. Documentation complexity across parallel documents was time-consuming and delayed because of low staff numbers. Complete data were valued more than correct data. Third, use of register data included clinical handover and monthly reporting, but little feedback was given from data users.
conclusionHealth workers invest major time recording register data for maternal and newborn core health indicators. Improving data quality requires standardised register designs streamlined to capture only necessary data elements. Consistent implementation processes are also needed. Two-way feedback between HMIS levels is critical to improve performance and accurately track progress towards agreed health goals.
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.