Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36331288›Full record

ArticleInternational health2023

Preceding birth interval, timing and number of antenatal contacts in Africa, 2010-2020.

Derek Anamaale Tuoyire, Joshua Amo-Adjei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Derek Anamaale TuoyireDepartment of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0001-6877-7826
Joshua Amo-AdjeiDepartment of Population and Health, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0001-8394-1874

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUtilization of adequate and quality prenatal healthcare services confers critical benefits to women and their unborn children. However, utilization rates remain low in many countries in Africa. Several studies have attempted to understand the primary drivers behind these low statistics. This article contributes to this discourse by examining the associations between birth interval and timing and number/frequency of antenatal care visits in Africa.

methodsWe pooled data from the publicly available Demographic and Health Surveys conducted in the last decade (2010-2020) for 32 African countries. Data were analysed using descriptive proportions and mixed effect binary logistic regression.

resultsThe results illustrate moderate significant associations between spacing on the most recent birth by ≥36 months and early (first trimester) first antenatal care contact in both our bivariate (odds ratio [OR] 1.18, p<0.001) and multivariate (OR 1.106, p<0.001) analyses. The benefits on optimal antenatal contacts predicted on spacing are also noticed with birth intervals of 24-35 months (OR 1.08, p<0.001) and ≥36 months (OR 1.48, p<0.001).

conclusionsOptimal birth spacing is beneficial for ANC utilization in terms of timing and total number of contacts. Post-partum family planning/contraceptive use can be an effective pathway to prolonging birth intervals. We argue that maternal and child health programmes strengthen prioritizing contraceptive use between births.

Indexed as

Birth IntervalsPrenatal CareAfricaContraceptive AgentsFemaleHumansParturitionPregnancyContraceptive AgentsadequateANC visits/contactsbirth intervalprenatalSSA

Identifiers

PMID36331288
PMCPMC10318961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.