Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35003714›Full record

ReviewJournal of global health2021

Community mobilization to strengthen support for appropriate and timely use of antenatal and postnatal care: A review of reviews.

Sara Dada, Özge Tunçalp, Anayda Portela, María Barreix, Brynne Gilmore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Sara DadaUCD Centre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Özge TunçalpUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Anayda PortelaDepartment of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health and Ageing, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
María BarreixUNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Brynne GilmoreUCD Centre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntenatal care (ANC) and postnatal care (PNC) are critical opportunities for women, babies and parents/families to receive quality care and support from health services. Community-based interventions may improve the accessibility, availability, and acceptance of this vital care. For example, community mobilization strategies have been used to involve and collaborate with women, families and communities to improve maternal and newborn health.

objectiveTo synthesize existing reviews of evidence on community mobilization strategies that strengthen support for appropriate and timely use of ANC and PNC.

methodsSix databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO) were searched for published reviews that describe community mobilization related strategies for ANC and/or PNC. Reviews were eligible for inclusion if they described any initiatives or strategies targeting the promotion of ANC and/or PNC uptake that included an element of community mobilization in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC), published after 2000. Included reviews were critically appraised according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Evidence Syntheses. This review of reviews was conducted following JBI guidelines for undertaking and reporting umbrella reviews.

resultsIn total 23 papers, representing 22 reviews were included. While all 22 reviews contained some description of community mobilization and ANC/PNC, 13 presented more in-depth details on the community mobilization processes and relevant outcomes. Seventeen reviews focused on ANC, four considered both ANC and PNC, and only one focused on PNC. Overall, 16 reviews reported at least one positive association between community mobilization activities and ANC/PNC uptake, while five reviews presented primary studies with no statistically significant change in ANC uptake and one included a primary study with a decrease in use of antenatal facilities. The community mobilization activities described by the reviews ranged from informative, passive communication to more active, participatory approaches that included engaging individuals or consulting local leaders and community members to develop priorities and action plans.

conclusionsWhile there is considerable momentum around incorporating community mobilization activities in maternal and newborn health programs, such as improving community support for the uptake of ANC and PNC, there is limited evidence on the processes used. Furthermore, the spectrum of terminology and variation in definitions should be harmonized to guide the implementation and evaluation efforts.

Indexed as

Community SupportPostnatal CareFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancyPrenatal CareQuality of Health CareSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID35003714
PMCPMC8710228

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.