ReviewSAGE open medicine2025
Knowledge of healthcare providers on preconception care in east Africa: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in SAGE open medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Preconception care involves measures to enhance a woman's physical, psychological, and nutritional health before pregnancy. Despite various observational studies assessing healthcare practitioners' knowledge of preconception care in East Africa, the overall pooled knowledge level remains unclear, and the studies often report inconsistent associated factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the aggregated knowledge of preconception care among healthcare providers in East Africa and identify influencing factors. Method: We searched studies using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar that were published between January 01, 2018 and November 30, 2024. This study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The quality of studies was evaluated using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment tool. The data were extracted by two authors independently using Microsoft Excel and analyzed by Stata version 17. A random effects model was applied to calculate the pooled level of knowledge and its associated factors. The International Prospective Register of Systematic Review registration number for the review was CRD42024608878. Results: A total of 12 studies comprising 4892 participants were involved in this meta-analysis. The pooled knowledge of preconception care among healthcare providers was 56% (95% CI: 45%-66%). This study showed that gender (odds ratio (OR) = 1.35), educational level (OR = 3.52), monthly salary (OR), work experience (OR = 1.77), Internet access (OR = 3.41), ever read the preconception care guideline (OR = 2.77), having Smartphone (OR = 1.70), working institution (OR = 2.05), Training on HIV testing and management (OR = 4.28), training on providing alcohol or tobacco cessation service (OR = 1.14), the presence of a library in a working health facility (OR = 1.98), taking training on preconception care education and counseling (OR = 3.44) were significant factors associated with knowledge of preconception care. Conclusion: The findings indicate that healthcare providers in East Africa have limited knowledge of preconception care. Gender, educational level, monthly salary, previous work experience, internet connection, awareness of preconception care policy, smartphone possession, type of work schedule, prior HIV testing, and management training, library access in healthcare facilities, and involvement in preconception care training meetings and counseling sessions are significant factors of the knowledge of preconception care among healthcare providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.