Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34861892›Full record

ReviewArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2021

Prevalence and determinants of Anemia among pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.

Meseret Belete Fite, Nega Assefa, Bizatu Mengiste

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Meseret Belete Fite *Department of Public health, Institute of Health Science, Wollega University, Nekemte, Ethiopia. meseretphd2014@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1914-6144
Nega Assefa *Department of Public health, School of public health, College of Health and Medical Sciences, Haramaya University, Harar, Ethiopia.
Bizatu Mengiste *Department of Public health, School of public health, College of Health and Medical Sciences, Haramaya University, Harar, Ethiopia.
Haramaya University · ETWollega University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnemia is one of the world's leading cause of disability and the most serious global public health issues. This systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out very prudently in order to give up the pooled prevalence and determinants of anemia in Sub-Saharan Africa. METHODOLOGY: To carry out this ephemeral systematic review and meta-analysis, a correlated literature review was done from various sources, PubMed Medline and Google Scholar Journals. Anemia related searching engine was used to make the study more evocative and intensive. We used modified Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cross sectional studies to evaluate the quality of the study in relations of their inclusion. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was tracked to conduct this study. The pooled effect size was computed using the review manager and Compressive Meta-analysis software.

resultsTwenty-fife studies, which encompassed 15,061 pregnant women, were chosen for the analysis. From those an overall prevalence of anemia in pregnancy in SSA was 35.6%. However, the result from meta-analysis showed that women who were infected with intestinal parasite were 3.59 times more likely to develop anemia compared to those who were not infected [OR:3.59, 95% CI (2.44,5.28)].The result showed that women who had no iron and folic-acid supplementation were 1.82 times more likely to develop anemia compared to those women who had iron and folic-acid supplementation {OR:1.82, 95% CI (1.22,2.70]. Women who had women were in third trimester pregnancy were 2.37 times more likely to develop anemia compared to those who were in first and second trimester [OR:2.37, 95% CI (1.78, 3.24)]. Women who had low dietary diversity score were 3.59 times more likely to develop anemia compared to those who had high dietary diversity score [OR: 3.59, 95% CI (2.44, 5.28].

conclusionsOur finding from this systematic review and meta-analysis displays the high case in prevalence of anemia among pregnant women in Sub-Saharan Africa. Predictors for this includes: intestinal parasite, iron and folic-acid supplementation, third trimester pregnancy and dietary diversified intake score were statistically correlated positively with anemia in pregnancy. These need cautious evaluation of impact of prevention effort for operational policy, programs and design nutrition intrusions for refining maternal food consumption during pregnancy. Also, dietary education intrusion requires to be prearranged to satisfy the desires of pregnant women. The finding of this work will be used as an evidences for policy makers of Africa; entirely for maternal and child health care. Lastly, we suggested further investigations to be carried out in the area of the study for more rigorous and comprehensive recommendations.

Indexed as

Intestinal parasiteiron and folic-acid supplementationmeta-analysisPrevalence of anemiaSub-Saharan AfricaSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34861892
PMCPMC8643002
OpenAlexW3216440936

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.