Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34391387›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Male partners' participation in birth preparedness and complication readiness in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Minyahil Tadesse Boltena, Abraham Sahlemichael Kebede, Ziad El-Khatib, Benedict Oppong Asamoah, Andualem Tadesse Boltena, Hawult Tyae, Melese Yeshambaw Teferi, Mulatu Biru Shargie

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Minyahil Tadesse BoltenaArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. minyahil.tadesse@ahri.gov.et.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5081-1480
Abraham Sahlemichael KebedeSchool of Health Sciences, University of Brighton, Brighton, UK.
Ziad El-KhatibWorld Health Programme, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue (UQAT), Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Benedict Oppong AsamoahDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Andualem Tadesse BoltenaSocial Medicine and Global Health, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Hawult TyaeArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Melese Yeshambaw TeferiArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Mulatu Biru ShargieArmauer Hansen Research Institute, Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Armauer Hansen Research Institute · ETKarolinska Institutet · SELund University · SEUniversité du Québec à Montréal · CAUniversity of Brighton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaternal and neonatal health outcomes remain a challenge in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) despite priority given to involving male partners in birth preparedness and complication readiness (BPCR). Men in LMICs often determine women's access to and affordability of health services. This systematic review and meta-analysis determined the pooled magnitude of male partner's participation in birth preparedness and complication readiness in LMICs.

methodsLiterature published in English language from 2004 to 2019 was retrieved from Google Scholar, PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. The Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tool for prevalence and incidence studies were used. A pooled statistical meta-analysis was conducted using STATA Version 14.0. The heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using the I

resultsThirty-seven studies with a total of 17, 148 participants were included. The pooled results showed that 42.4% of male partners participated in BPCR. Among the study participants, 54% reported having saved money for delivery, whereas 44% identified skilled birth attendants. 45.8% of male partners arranged transportation and 57.2% of study participants identified health facility as a place of birth. Only 16.1% of the male partners identified potential blood donors.

conclusionsA low proportion of male partners were identified to have participated in BPCR in LMICs. This calls countries in low- and middle-income setting for action to review their health care policies, to remove the barriers and promote facilitators to male partner's involvement in BPCR. Health systems in LMICs must design and innovate scalable strategies to improve male partner's arrangements for a potential blood donor and transportation for complications that could arise during delivery or postpartum haemorrhage.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeDeveloping CountriesFemaleHumansMaleMaternal Health ServicesPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPrenatal CareSpousesBirth PreparednessComplication ReadinessLMICsMale involvementParticipation

Identifiers

PMID34391387
PMCPMC8364032
OpenAlexW3195391949

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.