ReviewIrish journal of medical science2026
Prevalence of obstetric fistula: a systematic review and meta-analysis of available evidence from 38 countries.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObstetric fistula remains a preventable childbirth injury, but prevalence evidence is uneven across countries and regions. We synthesized country-level and regional evidence on obstetric fistula prevalence through 2025.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and other sources through October 1, 2025. Eligible cohort, cross-sectional, and survey datasets reported obstetric fistula or survey-defined obstetric fistula symptoms as a distinct outcome with a defined denominator. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis with Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression explored heterogeneity across geographic, socioeconomic, temporal, demographic, and study-level factors.
resultsSixty-two datasets from 38 countries included 2,547,755 women and 15,976 obstetric fistula cases. The overall pooled prevalence was 0.76% (95% CI: 0.47-1.05; I² = 99.97%). Regional prevalence was highest in the African Region (0.96%), followed by South-East Asia (0.63%), Europe (0.32%), the Eastern Mediterranean Region (0.13%), and North America (0.11%; regional subgroup P = 0.026). Subgroup differences were significant across income categories (P = 0.002) and HDI strata (P < 0.001), with higher estimates in lower-middle-income countries (0.94%), low-income countries (0.80%), and low-HDI settings (1.00%). High-risk populations (1.35%) and hospital-based studies (0.95%) had higher estimates than general-population (0.69%) and community-based studies (0.65%). Temporal differences should be interpreted cautiously because they may reflect methodological and population differences rather than true changes in disease burden.
conclusionAvailable evidence indicates that obstetric fistula remains unevenly distributed and highly heterogeneous. Standardized definitions, broader surveillance, and strengthened emergency obstetric and surgical services are needed to guide prevention, treatment, and progress monitoring toward fistula eradication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42474637What 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.