Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42898372›Full record

ArticleAJOG global reports2026

Pregnancy outcome documentation in low-resource settings: a multi-country study.

Alice Hucko, Jana Prauseová, Edward P K Parker, Rachel Ford, Oluwatosin Nkereuwem, Ugochukwu Madubueze, Suraj Bhattarai, Dan Kajungu, Agnes Msoka, Mir Mobarak Hossain and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJOG global reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Alice HuckoCentre for Global Health, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany (Hucko, Prauseová, Kampmann).
Jana PrauseováCentre for Global Health, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany (Hucko, Prauseová, Kampmann).
Edward P K ParkerDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and International Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK (Parker).
Rachel FordDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK (Ford and Kampmann).
Oluwatosin NkereuwemMedical Research Council Unit, The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Fajara, The Gambia (Nkereuwem and Kampmann).
Ugochukwu MadubuezeAlex-Ekwueme Federal University Teaching Hospital Abakaliki (AEFUTHA), Ebonyi State, Nigeria (Madubueze).
Suraj BhattaraiGlobal Health Research and Medical Interventions Institute, Kathmandu, Nepal (Bhattarai).
Dan KajunguMakerere University Centre for Health and Population Research, Kampala, Uganda (Kajungu).
Agnes MsokaKilimanjaro Clinical Research Institute (KCRI), Moshi, Tanzania (Msoka).
Mir Mobarak HossainPlanning and Research Unit, Directorate General of Health Services, Dhaka, Bangladesh (Hossain).
Beate KampmannCentre for Global Health, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany (Hucko, Prauseová, Kampmann).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the maternal vaccine portfolio expands, reliable documentation of adverse events of special interest (AESI) is critical for safety surveillance in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). However, such documentation is often not easily available, even prior to introduction of new vaccines, and background rates are therefore lacking.

methodsNested within a retrospective multisite analysis of routine maternal health data from six LMICs (Bangladesh, The Gambia, Nepal, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda) from 2019 to 2022, we extracted aggregated monthly counts of vaccination-relevant pregnancy AESI- preterm birth, stillbirth, congenital malformations, neonatal death, and maternal death- and assessed their availability, completeness, and consistency using descriptive analyses. Outcome rates were compared with published country-specific background estimates.

findingsAmong 123,867 pregnancies across 27 clinics (totaling 1277 clinic-months) in six LMICs, substantial limitations in pregnancy outcome recording were identified. AESI recording was predominantly paper-based (clinic registers in 92.6% of clinics, maternal-held documents in 51.9%); with use of digital systems in only 14.8% of clinics. Congenital malformations and preterm subcategories were absent in seven of 27 clinics (25.9%). Documentation completeness ranged from 65.2% to 68.9% for preterm birth categories to 96.8% to 98.4% for mortality outcomes (stillbirths, neonatal and maternal deaths). Considerable inter-clinic variability was noted, and observed rates diverged substantially from national background estimates for several pregnancy outcomes.

interpretationSubstantial gaps in documentation of routine clinical data across LMIC underscore the need for linked, standardized, and digital maternal and neonatal outcome documentation to support the safe introduction and surveillance of vaccines administered during pregnancy.

Identifiers

PMID42898372
PMCPMC13677763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.