ArticleBMC global and public health2026
Integrating group antenatal care into routine services: a registry-based cohort study in Geita, Tanzania.
Article in BMC global and public health, 2026. 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.
- Evaluating policy guidelines for the prevention and management of anaemia in pregnancy in Africa: a systematic scoping review of practices and recommendations.Tropical medicine and health · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGroup antenatal care (G-ANC) is an emerging service delivery model that integrates clinical assessments, health education, and peer support within group sessions. While evidence supports its effectiveness in pilot settings, less is known about its feasibility and impact when integrated into routine public health systems in low-resource settings.
methodsWe conducted a registry-based observational cohort study (January 2023-November 2024) across six government facilities in Geita Region, Tanzania (two hospitals, two health centers, and two dispensaries). Pregnant women with gestational age ≥ 20 weeks were enrolled into G-ANC cohorts. Data was abstracted from routine antenatal care (ANC), labor and delivery, and cohort records. Descriptive statistics summarized ANC attendance and service uptake; associations with adverse birth outcomes were examined using a binomial-logit generalized linear mixed model (GLMM).
resultsA total of 5936 women in 149 cohorts were enrolled. Overall, 93.9% completed ≥ 4 ANC visits (ANC4 +); 76.1% received ≥ 3 doses of malaria intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (IPTp3 +); 92.6% received iron-folate supplementation; and 96.2% delivered in health facilities. Only 8.5% initiated ANC in the first trimester, consistent with the ≥ 20-week threshold for G-ANC entry. In multivariable GLMM, completing ≥ 4 ANC visits was associated with lower odds of adverse birth outcomes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.122, 95% CI 0.06-0.24; p < 0.001). Attendance at hospital-level facilities was associated with higher odds (aOR = 2.91, 95% CI 1.37-6.18; p = 0.005), likely reflecting referral of high-risk pregnancies. First-trimester initiation showed no significant association (aOR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.27-3.93).
conclusionsIn routine settings, G-ANC was associated with high ANC attendance, strong uptake of essential interventions, and positive birth outcomes. Integration appears feasible within public systems, though adaptations are needed to promote earlier initiation and alignment with the WHO eight-contact model. Further research should examine costs, feasibility, scalability, and long-term impact.
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.