Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40211185›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025

Utilization of antenatal care among immigrant women in Norway: a nationwide register-based cohort study.

Torill A Rotevatn, Nina Høy-Petersen, Lema Hussaini, Siri E Håberg, Maria C Magnus, Nils-Halvdan Morken, Knut-Arne Wensaas, Eva Marie Flaathen, Rannveig Kaldager Hart

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Missed opportunities for maternal immunisation against influenza and COVID-19, Norway, October 2023 to May 2024: a population-based registry study.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2026
    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

9 authors.

Torill A RotevatnDivision of Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway. torillalise.rotevatn@fhi.no.
Nina Høy-PetersenDivision of Mental and Physical Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway.
Lema HussainiDivision of Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway.
Siri E HåbergCentre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway.
Maria C MagnusCentre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway.
Nils-Halvdan MorkenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, PO Box 1400, Bergen, 5021, Norway.
Knut-Arne WensaasResearch Unit for General Practice, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre AS, PO Box 7810, Bergen, 5020, Norway.
Eva Marie FlaathenDepartment of Nursing and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, St. Olavs plass, PO Box 4, Oslo, 0130, Norway.
Rannveig Kaldager HartCentre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, Oslo, 0213, Norway.

Funding

Foundation Dam 2024/FOR462142The Research Council of Norway, Centres of Excellence funding scheme 262700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternational research suggests that immigrants face poorer access to antenatal care, but comprehensive nationwide studies identifying variations across immigrant groups are lacking. Using national registries like the Medical Birth Registry, we compared antenatal care utilization among immigrant women by country/region of origin to Norwegian women.

methodsWe included 348,547 singleton births between 2012-2018 by women aged ≥ 16 years registered with ≥ 1 antenatal consultation in primary care, including 79,671 (22.9%) births by immigrant women. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both crude and adjusted logistic regression models, assessing the likelihood of immigrant women having fewer consultations than recommended by national guidelines compared to Norwegian women per trimester. Estimates were adjusted for relevant sociodemographic variables.

resultsLarge country-specific differences in estimates were noted across all trimesters. In the crude models, Eritrean (OR 3.01 [95%CI: 2.76-3.28]), Somali (OR 2.63 [95%CI: 2.48-2.79]) and Ethiopian (OR 1.90 [95%CI: 1.67-2.16]) women, and women from other Sub-Saharan countries (OR 1.92 [95%CI: 1.77-2.08]), had the highest odds of initiating antenatal care later than the first trimester. In later trimesters, care utilization by immigrants and Norwegian women were more similar, except for lower utilization among Somali women. Sociodemographic variables explained much of the observed differences.

conclusionLate initiation and substandard utilization of antenatal care among certain immigrant groups exists in Norway. Timely access to antenatal care is important for maternal and child health. Efforts should be initiated to facilitate earlier initiation of antenatal care, particularly among Eritrean, Somali, Ethiopian and other Sub-Saharan women.

Indexed as

Emigrants and ImmigrantsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePrenatal CareAdolescentAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNorwayPregnancyRegistriesYoung AdultAntenatal careHealth care utilizationImmigrantsNorwayObservational study

Identifiers

PMID40211185
PMCPMC11987317

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.