ArticlePLOS global public health2022
Assessment of health system readiness for routine maternal and newborn health services in Nepal: Analysis of a nationally representative health facility survey, 2015.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Minimum service standards assessment tool and the hospital strengthening program: a novel first step towards the quality improvement of Nepal's national hospital system.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2025Review
- Navigating Nepal's health financing system: A road to universal health coverage amid epidemiological and demographic transitions.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Changes in health facility readiness for obstetric and neonatal care services in Nepal: an analysis of cross-sectional health facility survey data in 2015 and 2021.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Dissecting antenatal care inequalities in western Nepal: insights from a community-based cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Input, process, and output factors contributing to quality of antenatal care services: a scoping review of evidence.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Access to and utilisation of routine maternal and newborn health (MNH) services, such as antenatal care (ANC), and perinatal services, has increased over the last two decades in Nepal. The availability, delivery, and utilisation of quality health services during routine MNH visits can significantly impact the survival of mothers and newborns. Capacity of health facility is critical for the delivery of quality health services. However, little is known about health system readiness (structural quality) of health facilities for routine MNH services and associated determinants in Nepal. Data were derived from the Nepal Health Facility Survey (NHFS) 2015. Total of 901 health facilities were assessed for structural quality of ANC services, and 454 health facilities were assessed for perinatal services. Adapting the World Health Organization's Service Availability and Readiness Assessment manual, we estimated structural quality scores of health facilities for MNH services based on the availability and readiness of related subdomain-specific items. Several health facility-level characteristics were considered as independent variables. Logistic regression analyses were conducted, and the odds ratio (OR) was reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The significance level was set at p-value of <0.05. The mean score of the structural quality of health facilities for ANC, and perinatal services was 0.62, and 0.67, respectively. The average score for the availability of staff (e.g., training) and guidelines-related items in health facilities was the lowest (0.37) compared to other four subdomains. The odds of optimal structural quality of health facilities for ANC services were higher in private health facilities (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.65, 95% CI: 1.48, 4.74), and health facilities supervised by higher authority (aOR = 1.96; CI: 1.22, 3.13) while peripheral health facilities had lower odds (aOR = 0.13; CI: 0.09, 0.18) compared to their reference groups. Private facilities were more likely (aOR = 1.69; CI:1.25, 3.40) to have optimal structural quality for perinatal services. Health facilities of Karnali (aOR = 0.29; CI: 0.09, 0.99) and peripheral areas had less likelihood (aOR = 0.16; CI: 0.10, 0.27) to have optimal structural quality for perinatal services. Provincial and local governments should focus on improving the health system readiness in peripheral and public facilities to deliver quality MNH services. Provision of trained staff and guidelines, and supply of laboratory equipment in health facilities could potentially equip facilities for optimal quality health services delivery. In addition, supervision of health staff and facilities and onsite coaching at peripheral areas from higher-level authorities could improve the health management functions and technical capacity for delivering quality MNH services. Local governments can prioritise inputs, including providing a trained workforce, supplying equipment for laboratory services, and essential medicine to improve the quality of MNH services in their catchment.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.