Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39695753›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Effective coverage of maternal and neonatal healthcare services in low-and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

Ayelign Mengesha Kassie, Elizabeth Eakin, Aklilu Endalamaw, Anteneh Zewdie, Eskinder Wolka, Yibeltal Assefa

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Transforming public mental health: a review on global trends, challenges, and pathways to change.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Ayelign Mengesha KassieSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. ayelignmengesha59@gmail.com.
Elizabeth EakinSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Aklilu EndalamawSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Anteneh ZewdieInternational Institute for Primary Health Care, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Eskinder WolkaInternational Institute for Primary Health Care, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Yibeltal AssefaSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is no consistent operationalization of effective coverage (EC) across studies. Therefore, this scoping review synthesized evidence on the definitions and measurement approaches, outcomes reported, and the factors that are associated with variations in quality-adjusted EC estimates of maternal and neonatal healthcare services in low- and middle-income countries.

methodsArticle search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and other databases. Then, title, abstract, and full text screenings for inclusion were performed by two authors independently and disagreements were resolved through discussion. In case of duplication, the full-text published articles were retained, and the results are presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews checklist as a guide.

resultsOverall, 36 articles were included in this scoping review. In most articles, EC has been defined from the perspectives of people in need utilizing healthcare services in well-equipped health facilities and from actual receipt of quality services. In addition, usage, instead of need, has been used as a domain in estimating EC in some instances. Effective coverage ranged from 0% for different services including for post-partum care, to 84% for antenatal care. Moreover, different socio-demographic factors including wealth index, education, and residence are found to have an association with variations in EC of maternal and neonatal healthcare services with the wealthiest, most educated, and those living in urban areas having higher estimates. From the supply side, numerous factors, particularly health facility capacity-related constraints, have been reported to be associated with low EC of those services.

conclusionsThe variability in the definition and measurement approaches of EC across studies emphasizes the need for standardization for better comparison in future research. We recommend that quality-adjusted EC be defined in two ways: intervention-specific service delivery EC and general service delivery EC. In addition, disparities in EC are observed among women with different socioeconomic status including educational level and wealth index. Organizational capacity constraints and other health system and societal factors also contributed to variations in EC.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfant, NewbornMaternal Health ServicesPregnancyAntenatal careDelivery careEffective coveragePostnatal careQuality-adjusted coverage

Identifiers

PMID39695753
PMCPMC11654249

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.