ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Utilization, satisfaction, and perceived maternal health benefits of group antenatal care in Karu LGA, North Central, Nigeria.
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.
- Risk Factors and Awareness of Preeclampsia Among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Nasarawa State.Public health challenges · 2026Article
- Implementation factors of group antenatal care in low-resource settings in Tanzania: A qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.PLOS global public 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGroup Antenatal Care (G-ANC) has emerged as an innovative model for improving maternal health service delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study assessed the utilization, satisfaction, and perceived effectiveness of G-ANC among pregnant women attending selected primary healthcare centers in Karu Metropolis, Nasarawa State, Nigeria. METHODOLOGY: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among 450 pregnant women systematically sampled from primary healthcare facilities. Data were collected using structured interviewer-administered questionnaires and analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests for associations (p < 0.05). Variables explored included socio-demographics, obstetric history, complications, G-ANC experiences, and perceived barriers to care. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Most respondents (72.9%) were aged 20-25, with a majority being married (81.1%) and housewives (80%). A high proportion (85.8%) reported experiencing complications during pregnancy, notably hemorrhage (28.9%) and infections (52%). G-ANC was widely utilized, with 88.4% attending 7-9 sessions. Satisfaction with G-ANC services was high (88.4%), and 75.6% strongly agreed that G-ANC improved their understanding of antenatal care. Institutional delivery uptake was 95.6%, and 84.9% perceived that G-ANC contributed to reducing maternal morbidity and mortality. However, financial (36%) and geographic barriers (49.3%) persisted, and 28.4% reported delays in seeking care. G-ANC was well-accepted, enhanced maternal health literacy, and improved institutional delivery rates. However, barriers such as transportation and financial constraints limited optimal care-seeking. The findings align with similar Nigerian studies showing high satisfaction with G-ANC but call for system-level interventions. Integration of financial support schemes, community engagement, male involvement, and improved infrastructure are necessary for broader impact.
conclusionG-ANC presents a promising strategy to enhance maternal health outcomes in LMICs. Strategic scale-up, system-wide support, and longitudinal evaluations are essential to optimize its potential and address persistent health system barriers.
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.