ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2021
Evaluation of a pilot program that integrated prenatal screening into routine antenatal care in western rural China: an interrupted time-series study.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The burden of congenital birth defects between 1990 and 2019 in China: an observational study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Tracking progress towards universal health coverage for essential health services in China, 2008-2018.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Enhancing equity and coverage through supply- and demand-side integration policies for maternal/newborn health: Field experience from rural Western China.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluated a large-scale pilot program in Shaanxi Province, western rural China, which integrated prenatal screening interventions for congenital abnormalities into routine antenatal programs.
methodsWe surveyed 1,597 mothers who gave birth between 2009 and 2016. Adopting the interrupted time-series design, we evaluated the program's impact on awareness, coverage, and cost, by comparing two counties with only supply-side policies, and two counties from the neighbouring province with no policies; and among the two counties with both supply- and demand-side policies and the two counties with only supply-side policies. We adjusted the sampling procedure and women's background characteristics. We conducted subgroup analyses by women's education.
findingsAfter one year of implementation, the coverage of prenatal foetal aneuploidies and B-ultrasound screening rose by 25.0% and 23.5%. The program's supply-side policies attributed to 17.2 percentage points (90%CI 7.8-26.6%) and 27.3 percentage points (90%CI 16.2-38.5%) in coverage, and contributed to a higher median cost of 796.5RMB (90%CI 595.5-997.5). These significantly affected women with secondary education and above. However, the program's demand-side measures, that is, vouchers, seemed to be effective only in the mountainous regions, which raised awareness, and increased coverage of prenatal foetal aneuploidies screening by 28.6 percentage points (90%CI 13.4-43.8%), while not increasing costs. These significantly affected women with primary education and below. Education-related inequalities widened post-program in counties with only supply-side policies, but no inequalities existed in counties with demand-side policies.
interpretationShaanxi's program made a pilot study to other provinces of China to integrate antenatal services. Government subsidies might be more effective in targeting specific geographic locations and people with primary education and lower.
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.