Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36510190›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022

Antenatal care utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic: an online cross-sectional survey among Filipino women.

Glaiza S de Guzman, Maria Jesusa B Banal-Silao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Epidemiology and placental pathology of intrauterine fetal demise in a tertiary hospital in the Philippines.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Glaiza S de GuzmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of the Philippines Manila - Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines. gsdeguzman1@alum.up.edu.ph.
Maria Jesusa B Banal-SilaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of the Philippines Manila - Philippine General Hospital, Manila, Philippines.
University of the Philippines Manila · PH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide, including interruption of antenatal care services. The study aimed to determine the utilization of antenatal care services of Filipino women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among postpartum women using an online self-administered survey in the Philippines from January 1 to March 31, 2022. The questionnaire used to assess health-seeking behavior was validated before the survey proper. Women aged 18 to 45 years who delivered in 2021 were recruited. The participants answered a structured questionnaire to assess their access, perceptions, and utilization of antenatal care. Utilization of antenatal care was evaluated using standard measures, including the timing of initiation of antenatal care, number of subsequent visits, and place of consults. The factors affecting the adequacy of antenatal care were determined for each variable through simple logistic regression.

resultsA total of 318 women were enrolled in the study. All the respondents agreed on the necessity of antenatal care. However, only 46.37% had six or more in-person antenatal visits, with the majority attended to by midwives at community health centers. Most respondents (71.38%) initiated antenatal care during the first trimester. Almost half reported deferrals of visits mainly due to lockdown restrictions, transportation problems, and financial issues. Positive predictors of adequate antenatal care were prior pregnancies (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.11-9.20 for 2-3 prior pregnancies; OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.45-6.29 for 4 or more prior pregnancies), live births (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.04-2.69 for 2-3 prior live births; OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.17-5.16 for 4 or more prior live births), having living children (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.09-2.79), spousal support (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.01-3.03 for married women; OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.09-3.28 for women with common-law partners), history of obstetric complications (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.33-5.97), and use of private vehicles (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.05-6.68). Negative predictors were employment (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22-0.63) and medical examination prior to pregnancy (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.23-0.58).

conclusionDespite an overall positive perception of the necessity of antenatal care, utilization has been inadequate in more than half of the respondents. Various individual, facility, and policy-level factors affected the utilization of services during the pandemic. There is a need to augment antenatal care services in the country by mitigating barriers to access. The public health response should strengthen collaborative efforts with primary-level healthcare to increase service provision, especially to more vulnerable populations.

Indexed as

COVID-19Prenatal CareChildCommunicable Disease ControlCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansPandemicsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnancyAntenatal careCOVID-19PandemicPhilippines

Identifiers

PMID36510190
PMCPMC9742662
OpenAlexW4311584655

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.