ArticleBMC health services research2025
Ending preventable maternal deaths in Malawi: the stakeholders consensus approach to identify maternal health needs priorities.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Acceptability of Modified Early Obstetric Warning Systems Among Midwives in Malawi; An Exploratory Qualitative Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Malawian context presents multifactorial challenges that hinder the provision of high-quality maternal health services, leading to high maternal morbidity and mortality rates. Priority setting is a crucial concept that can benefit the healthcare system in Malawi by efficiently distributing limited resources and maximising gains in maternal healthcare. We undertook a national maternal health prioritisation exercise involving key stakeholders to enhance delivery of maternal care in Malawi.
methodsDuring group discussions, the Nominal Group Technique was adapted to facilitate consensus on priorities after data and real-life experiences from service users were presented. The process involved four stages: (1) Silent generation of priorities, where participants independently listed their priorities using pieces of paper, (2) Consolidation of priorities, where all individual priorities were combined into a single list on the flip chart and similar priorities merged, (3) Clarification and discussion at a group level using a prioritisation matrix, allowing participants to clarify and discuss the listed priorities, and (4) Ranking of generated priorities, where participants voted or used an online scoring system to determine the most important priorities. All papers and flip charts used were collected, and discussions were recorded to capture how decisions were made, and their rationales. Facilitators and authors met to manually analyse the summaries.
resultsSeventy-four stakeholders participated in the prioritisation workshop, forming eight groups. Through individual prioritisation exercises, 233 priorities were identified. Subsequently, the consolidation of priorities resulted in 104 priorities, which were further reduced to 40 priorities during clarification and discussion stage using the prioritisation matrix. After selecting the top two priorities from each group, 12 priorities remained, which underwent the final stage of ranking and voting, and 57 stakeholders voted. The top three priorities identified were: (1) respectful maternity care, (2) information and data management, and (3) strengthening skills of birth attendants.
conclusionAchieving national maternal health targets demands prioritising respectful maternity care, accessible information, robust data management/information, and skilled birth attendants, all of which empower staff and clients to drive positive changes. Stakeholders can leverage these priorities to guide future programme implementation, research investments, and country-specific adaptations through meaningful engagement with national stakeholders.
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.