ArticleCureus2025
Sociodemographic and Regional Inequalities in Antenatal Care (ANC) in Brazil.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite improvements in antenatal care (ANC) coverage in Brazil over the years, social inequalities persist, compromising the quality and effectiveness of the care provided to pregnant women. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of pregnant women by adequacy of prenatal care according to sociodemographic characteristics and regions of residence. Methods: Using data from the 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey, we analyzed 2,875 women aged 15 years or older who had given birth in the two years preceding the survey. Based on the Ministry of Health guidelines, ANC was categorized as inadequate (less than six consultations or not having started in the first trimester of pregnancy) and in three different levels of adequacy, from least to most adequate. To identify the main determinants of high-quality ANC, a multivariate logistic regression model was applied, using sociodemographic and geographic variables as predictors. Results: Prevalence of women with inadequate ANC was 22.8%. Adequacy proportions of levels 1, 2, and 3 were 77.2, 51.8, and 42.4%, respectively. According to the results of the multivariate logistic regression model, women living in the North and Northeast regions were less likely to receive adequate ANC compared with those in the South (OR = 0.60 and OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.39-0.93 and 0.44-0.95, respectively; p < 5%). Women living in urban areas compared with rural areas (OR = 1.64; 95% CI 1.20-2.26, p < 1%), as well as those with a partner or spouse (OR = 1.41; 95% CI 1.04-1.91, p < 5%), were significantly more likely to receive adequate ANC. Women with primary education showed less adequate ANC (OR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.35-0.88, p < 5%), as did younger women. Having been assisted by a doctor during pregnancy was significantly associated with better adequacy (OR = 1.72; 95%CI 1.29-2.29, p < 1%). The other variables (residence in the capital, race/skin color, and location of consultations) were not statistically significant. Conclusion: The findings emphasize the importance of monitoring the quality of ANC, especially to identify and meet the needs of the most vulnerable women during pregnancy.
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.