SynthesisJournal of global health2026
The role of gender in early childcare practices in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of global health, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gender disparities in early childcare practices impede gender equality and create long-lasting barriers to girls' health, well-being, and future opportunities. Through this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to quantitatively synthesise evidence on gender disparities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) across the World Health Organization's five components of nurturing care: breastfeeding, immunisation, prenatal check-ups, postnatal check-ups, and healthcare expenditure for children under five. Methods: We searched sixteen scientific databases, journals, and repositories in November 2021 and again in January-February 2024, for studies examining gender differences in early childcare practices in LMICs, covering breastfeeding, immunisation, prenatal, and postnatal check-ups, and healthcare expenditure for children under five. We set no restrictions on publication type or date, but with limitations to English-language studies with sample sizes over 30. We standardised effect estimates from individual studies into Hedges' g effect sizes and meta-analysed them using robust variance estimation. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal tool. Results: We identified 78 eligible studies covering 55 LMICs, with 52 studies and 231 effect sizes included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed gender discrimination against girls across outcomes (52 studies; Hedges' g = -0.082; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.133, 0.030), particularly pronounced in breastfeeding (17 studies; Hedges' g = -0.051; 95% CI = -0.089, -0.012) and immunisation (32 studies; Hedges' g = -0.073; 95% CI = -0.13, -0.016). While we also observed significant differences in favour of boys in pre- and post-natal check-ups (four studies; Hedges' g = -0.029; 95% CI = -0.058, -0.000), the results were less robust due to a limited number of studies. We found no gender differences in healthcare spending patterns (seven studies; Hedges' g = -0.278; 95% CI = -0.641, 0.083). Our meta-regression highlighted significant associations between a country's ranking on the Gender Inequality Index and effect sizes, indicating stronger health-related penalties for girls. Effect sizes did not significantly vary by regions and the quality of included studies. Conclusion: s Our findings emphasise significant gender disparities in early childcare practices and point to the need for more evidence on inequalities in healthcare access and expenditures. We simultaneously observed signs of a narrowing gender gap in recent years, suggesting gradual progress toward more equitable child health outcomes. Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42021286151.
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.