Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37296420›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2023

The effects of mHealth interventions on improving institutional delivery and uptake of postnatal care services in low-and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Reta Tsegaye Gayesa, Fei Wan Ngai, Yao Jie Xie

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. When HIPAA hurts: legal barriers to texting may reinforce healthcare disparities and disenfranchise vulnerable patients.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
    Review
  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 1 institution in 2 countries.

Reta Tsegaye GayesaSchool of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong S.A.R, China. retatg@gmail.com.
Fei Wan NgaiSchool of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong S.A.R, China.
Yao Jie XieSchool of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong S.A.R, China.
Hong Kong Polytechnic University · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMaternal mortality due to pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum is a global challenge. Particularly, in low-and lower-income countries, the outcomes of these complications are quite substantial. In recent years, studies exploring the effect of mobile health on the improvement of maternal health are increasing. However, the effect of this intervention on the improvement of institutional delivery and postnatal care utilization was not well analyzed systematically, particularly in low and lower-middle-income countries.

objectiveThe main aim of this review was to assess the effect of mobile heath (mHealth) interventions on improving institutional delivery, postnatal care service uptake, knowledge of obstetric danger signs, and exclusive breastfeeding among women of low and lower-middle-income countries.

methodsCommon electronic databases like PubMed, EMBASE, the Web of Science, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane library, Google scholar, and gray literature search engines like Google were used to search relevant articles. Articles that used interventional study designs and were conducted in low and lower-middle-income countries were included. Sixteen articles were included in the final systematic review and meta-analysis. Cochrane's risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of included articles.

resultsThe overall outcome of the systematic review and meta-analysis showed that MHealth intervention has a positive significant effect in improving the institutional delivery (OR = 2.21 (95%CI: 1.69-2.89), postnatal care utilization (OR = 4.13 (95%CI: 1.90-8.97), and exclusive breastfeeding (OR = 2.25, (95%CI: 1.46-3.46). The intervention has also shown a positive effect in increasing the knowledge of obstetric danger signs. The subgroup analysis based on the intervention characteristics showed that there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups based on the intervention characteristics for institutional delivery (P = 0.18) and postnatal care utilizations (P = 0.73).

conclusionsThe study has found out that mHealth intervention has a significant effect on improving facility delivery, postnatal care utilization, rate of exclusive breastfeeding, and knowledge of danger signs. There were also findings that reported contrary to the overall outcome which necessitates conducting further studies to enhance the generalizability of the effect of mHealth interventions on these outcomes.

Indexed as

Postnatal CareTelemedicineDeveloping CountriesFemaleHumansParturitionPostpartum PeriodPregnancyMeta-analysismHealthPostnatal careWomen

Identifiers

PMID37296420
PMCPMC10257264
OpenAlexW4380081061

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.