Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34689787›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2021

Estimating population-based coverage of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH) interventions from health management information systems: a comprehensive review.

George Mwinnyaa, Elizabeth Hazel, Abdoulaye Maïga, Agbessi Amouzou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Pregnancy Intentions and Maternal Health Behaviours: Observational Study in 18 African Countries.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

George MwinnyaaDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, MD, 21205, Baltimore, USA.
Elizabeth HazelDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, MD, 21205, Baltimore, USA.
Abdoulaye MaïgaDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, MD, 21205, Baltimore, USA.
Agbessi AmouzouDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, MD, 21205, Baltimore, USA. aamouzo1@jhu.edu.

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Contdown to 2030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoutinely collected health facility data usually captured and stored in Health Management Information Systems (HMIS) are potential sources of data for frequent and local disaggregated estimation of the coverage of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health interventions (RMNCH), but have been under-utilized due to concerns over data quality. We reviewed methods for estimation of national or subnational coverage of RMNCH interventions using HMIS data exclusively or in conjunction with survey data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsWe conducted a comprehensive review of studies indexed in PubMed and Scopus to identify potential papers based on predefined search terms. Two reviewers screened the papers using defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following sequences of title, abstract and full paper reviews, we retained 18 relevant papers.

results12 papers used only HMIS data and 6 used both HMIS and survey data. There is enormous lack of standards in the existing methods for estimating RMNCH intervention coverage; all appearing to be highly author dependent. The denominators for coverage measures were estimated using census, non-census and combined projection-based methods. No satisfactory methods were found for treatment-based coverage indicators for which the estimation of target population requires the population prevalence of underlying conditions. The estimates of numerators for the coverage measures were obtained from the count of users or visits and in some cases correction for completeness of reporting in the HMIS following an assessment of data quality.

conclusionsStandard methods for correcting numerators from HMIS data for accurate estimation of coverage of RMNCH interventions are needed to expand the use of these data. More research and investments are required to improve denominators for health facility-derived statistics. Improvement in routine data quality and analytical methods would allow for timely estimation of RMNCH intervention coverage at the national and subnational levels.

Indexed as

Management Information SystemsMaternal-Child Health ServicesChildChild HealthFamilyFemaleHealth FacilitiesHumansInfant, NewbornMaternal HealthPregnancyReproductive HealthChildCoverageHealthHMISLMICsMaternalNeonatalReproductiveReviewRMNCH

Identifiers

PMID34689787
PMCPMC8542459

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.