ArticlePloS one2021
Mixed Methods Lot Quality Assurance Sampling: A novel, rapid methodology to inform equity focused maternal health programming in rural Rajasthan, India.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the coverage of sexually transmitted infection prevention and control services in eight districts in Central Uganda: lot quality assurance sampling survey.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Prevalence of osteoporosis and associated factors among people aged 50 years and older in the Madhesh province of Nepal: a community-based cross-sectional study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
India has experienced a significant increase in facility-based delivery (FBD) coverage and reduction in maternal mortality. Nevertheless, India continues to have high levels of maternal health inequity. Improving equity requires data collection methods that can produce a better contextual understanding of how vulnerable populations access and interact with the health care system at a local level. While large population-level surveys are valuable, they are resource intensive and often lack the contextual specificity and timeliness to be useful for local health programming. Qualitative methods can be resource intensive and may lack generalizability. We describe an innovative mixed-methods application of Large Country-Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LC-LQAS) that provides local coverage data and qualitative insights for both FBD and antenatal care (ANC) in a low-cost and timely manner that is useful for health care providers working in specific contexts. LC-LQAS is a version of LQAS that combines LQAS for local level classification with multistage cluster sampling to obtain precise regional or national coverage estimates. We integrated qualitative questions to uncover mothers' experiences accessing maternal health care in the rural district of Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India. We interviewed 313 recently delivered, low-income women in 18 subdistricts. All respondents participated in both qualitative and quantitative components. All subdistricts were classified as having high FBD coverage with the upper threshold set at 85%, suggesting that improved coverage has extended to vulnerable women. However, only two subdistricts were classified as high ANC coverage with the upper threshold set at 40%. Qualitative data revealed a severe lack of agency among respondents and that household norms of care seeking influenced uptake of ANC and FBD. We additionally report on implementation outcomes (acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, effectiveness, fidelity, and cost) and how study results informed the programs of a local health non-profit.
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.