ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Assessment of effective coverage of antenatal care and factors affecting its outcome in Ethiopia.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of Perinatal Care in Zambia in the Context of WHO Recommendations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Exploring satisfaction on ANC digital health among pregnant women: a qualitative study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntenatal care services play a pivotal role in mitigating maternal and new-born morbidity and mortality. In the era of SDG, emphasis has been given to quality. To achieve these health goals, it is no longer sufficient to measure the coverage of service uptake; thus, the quality of care received by people who access services needs to be counted using Effective coverage (EC) as one quality measurements. This study aimed to measure Effective coverage of antenatal care services and factors affecting the outcome in Ethiopia.
methodsThis study used secondary datasets from two cross-sectional surveys: the National Health Equity, a household study focused on pregnant women within five years of the survey; and the Service Provision Assessment, a study in facilities offered antenatal care. Data were analyzed using STATA v18. The datasets were merged and linked ecologically at the regional level. Logistic regression analysis was employed to identify determinant factors.
resultsThe study revealed that 63% of pregnant women had at least one ANC visit while 34% had four or more. Of the total 865 facilities analyzed, 77% were prepared to offer ANC services. The input-adjusted ANC coverage was 48.7%, while the intervention-adjusted coverage was 16.3%, and the Effective coverage of ANC was 12.3%. Pregnant women lacked formal education (AOR = 2.09; 95% CI = 1.66, 2.63), who lived in pastoral regions had AOR: 2.14 (95% CI: 1.50-3.06) and were in the poorest wealth quintile (AOR = 5.56; 95% CI = 4.19, 7.37) were more likely to have low utilization of Effective coverage. Women who reside within 10 km radius to health facility (AOR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.29, 0.38) and urban residents (AOR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.64, 0.93) were less likely to have low Effective coverage.
conclusionOverall, the antenatal care Effective coverage in Ethiopia is low. This could be due to low service contact coverage and high dropout during the antenatal follow-up period. Access to facilities and socio-demographic variables also affect the effectiveness of coverage. To increase the numbers of ANC visits and their completion, providing comprehensive and continuous education to the community are needed and the health system should refocus on improving the quality of ANC services.
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.