SynthesisFrontiers in global women's health2025
Utilization of partograph and associated factors among obstetric caregivers in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in global women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Effective use of the partograph is crucial in identifying abnormal labor (prolonged and obstructed labor) and taking appropriate actions. However, in Ethiopia, the prevalence of obstructed labor is much higher at 11.8% and contributes to 14.4% of the total maternal deaths due to underutilization of the partograph by obstetric caregivers. Although a previous systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) had been conducted, they were not representative on a national level as they included a limited number of studies and did not evaluate the current prevalence of partograph utilization beyond July 2019. Since then, there have been inconsistent studies assessing the proportion of partograph utilization and its associated factors. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of partograph utilization and its associated factors in Ethiopia. Method: Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, and HINARI from 1 September 2013 to 23 October 2023. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled prevalence and adjusted odds ratio. Stata (version 11.0) was used to analyze the data. Cochrane Result: Overall, 661 articles were retrieved, and finally, 23 studies were included in this systematic review, including 7,649 participants. The pooled prevalence of partograph utilization was 54.92% (95% CI: 43.38-66.45). The subgroup analysis showed that partograph utilization was highest in the Dire Dawa region and lowest in the Amhara region. Factors such as partograph training [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 3.63, 95% CI: 2.57-5.25], good knowledge about partograph (AOR = 2.63, 95% CI: 1.62-4.26), a favorable attitude toward partograph (AOR = 1.95, 95% CI: 1.35-2.82), partograph availability (AOR = 0.89, 95% CI: 2.24-6.61), and being in the midwifery profession (AOR = 0.09, 95% CI: 1.78-5.25) were significantly associated with partograph utilization. Conclusion: The pooled prevalence of partograph utilization in Ethiopia was low. Partograph training, good knowledge about partograph, favorable attitude toward partograph, partograph availability in the health facility, and being in the midwifery profession were significantly associated with partograph utilization. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier (CRD42023475818).
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.