SynthesisJournal of epidemiology and global health2024
Maternal and Child Health Training of Traditional Birth Attendants and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of epidemiology and global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coexisting traditional and biomedical healthcare systems: a mixed-methods analysis of community health workers and traditional birth attendants' contributions to perinatal health behaviors in rural India.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Perceived community acceptance on traditional birth attendants assisted childbirth care and associated factors among pregnant women in Ethiopia.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Using the Lived Experience From Traditional Midwives in Remote Guatemala to Guide Improvement in Maternal Outcomes.Journal of midwifery & women's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn remote communities, maternal and child health is often compromised due to limited access to healthcare. Simultaneously, these communities historically rely greatly on traditional birth attendants (TBAs). However, optimal integration of these traditional methods with modern healthcare practices remains a topic of debate. We assessed the effect of maternal and child health training of traditional birth attendants on adverse pregnancy outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to answer the above research question. We independently screened studies using databases like PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL, extracted data, and assessed the study quality. Due to fewer original studies in this field, we considered both pre-post and between-group differences to assess the effect of differences. These were synthesised separately, assessed against a p-value function, and subjected to sensitivity analyses.
resultsWe included six interventional studies. Training TBAs reduced the risk of perinatal mortality [0.69, 0.61-0.78] and 7-day neonatal mortality [0.65, 0.53-0.80] but not stillbirth [0.70, 0.39-1.26]. In randomized controlled trials, there is a lower risk of perinatal mortality [0.73, 0.67-0.79] and neonatal mortality [0.70, 0.62-0.80] but not stillbirth [0.81, 0.56-1.18] with trained traditional birth attendants. There are methodological concerns with most existing studies, including domains like allocation concealment. DISCUSSION: There is some evidence of the benefit of training TBAs, though of a low to very low certainty. Due to fewer studies, inconsistent estimates for different critical outcomes, and concerns with the existing studies, further well-designed studies can give more insights. They can also help optimize the contents of TBA training interventions. PROTOCOL: CRD42023412935 (PROSPERO).
Indexed as
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.