ArticlePloS one2025
Feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of group antenatal care on the continuum of care and perinatal outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
introductionWomen with adequate antenatal care (ANC) experience more reduction in adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes compared to those with insufficient care. However, the conventional individualized ANC models have not significantly improved perinatal outcomes. Comprehensive, woman-centered group ANC (G-ANC) interventions, integrating medical care with education, demonstrate positive effects on maternal and newborn health. While promising evidence exists in sub-Saharan Africa, the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of G-ANC in resource-limited settings require further investigation. The variability in current studies further indicated the need for meta-analyses and systematic reviews to consolidate findings and clarify the overall effectiveness of G-ANC interventions. This synthesis aims to provide comprehensive evidence supporting the implementation of group prenatal care models in low-resource settings. Ultimately, it seeks to establish robust evidence to guide policy and practice, contributing to reduced maternal and perinatal mortality in the region. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. A comprehensive literature search will be conducted across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINHAL, to identify pertinent articles published from January 1, 2016, to June 30, 2024. Experimental studies (pre-post, quasi-experimental study, cluster randomized controlled trial), prospective cohort design, prospective comparative study, and qualitative and mixed method designs will be included in the review. The Abstract and full-text screening will be conducted by three reviewers using Covidence, according to the eligibility criteria set. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools, specifically designed for JBI Systematic Reviews, will be utilized to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using the Higgins test. Meta-analysis will be conducted using R statistical software version 4.4.2, which will implement random effects models to determine the weights. Pre-specified subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be performed as needed. The study results will be reported in order, starting with primary outcomes and then secondary outcomes and important subgroup outcomes analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not applicable as no original data will be collected. The findings of this review will be disseminated through publication and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024565501.
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.