Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34933972›Full record

ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2021

Household Survey Measurement of Newborn Postnatal Care: Coverage, Quality Gaps, and Internal Inconsistencies in Responses.

Kimberly Peven, Louise Tina Day, Debra Bick, Edward Purssell, Cath Taylor, Joseph Akuze, Lindsay Mallick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health, science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors.

Kimberly PevenFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom. Kimberly.peven@kcl.ac.uk.
Louise Tina DayMaternal and Newborn Health Group, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Centre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Debra BickWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Edward PurssellLittle Havens Children's Hospice, Benfleet, United Kingdom.
Cath TaylorSchool of Health Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
Joseph AkuzeMaternal and Newborn Health Group, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Centre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive, & Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Lindsay MallickDepartment of Family Science, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReliable measurement of newborn postnatal care is essential to understand gaps in coverage and quality and thereby improve outcomes. This study examined gaps in coverage and measurement of newborn postnatal care in the first 2 days of life.

methodsWe analyzed Demographic and Health Survey data from 15 countries for 71,366 births to measure the gap between postnatal contact coverage and content coverage within 2 days of birth. Coverage was a contact with the health system in the first 2 days (postnatal check or newborn care intervention), and quality was defined as reported receipt of 5 health worker-provided interventions. We examined internal consistency between interrelated questions regarding examination of the umbilical cord.

resultsReported coverage of postnatal check ranged from 13% in Ethiopia to 78% in Senegal. Report of specific newborn care interventions varied widely by intervention within and between countries. Quality-coverage gaps were high, ranging from 26% in Malawi to 89% in Burundi. We found some internally inconsistent reporting of newborn care. The percentage of women who reported that a health care provider checked their newborn's umbilical cord but responded "no" to the postnatal check question was as high as 16% in Malawi.

conclusionReliable measurement of coverage and content of early postnatal newborn care is essential to track progress in improving quality of care. Postnatal contact coverage is challenging to measure because it may be difficult for women to distinguish postnatal care from intrapartum care and it is a less recognizable concept than antenatal care. Co-coverage measures may provide a useful summary of contact and content, reflecting both coverage and an aspect of quality.

Indexed as

Postnatal CarePrenatal CareEthiopiaFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMalawiPregnancyUmbilical Cord

Identifiers

PMID34933972
PMCPMC8691891

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.