ArticlePloS one2025
Prevalence and determinants of mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact in Ghana.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the well-established role of skin-to-skin contact in reducing neonatal mortality, its implementation varies significantly across geographical regions, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore, we estimated the prevalence of mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact at birth and investigated the factors associated with its practice in Ghana.
methodsWe used data from the 2022 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey. The analysis included 3833 mother-child pairs. Data was analysed using Stata 17.0, with percentages and confidence intervals (CI) used to present the prevalence of mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact. We employed multilevel binary logistic regression models to examine factors associated with the practice of mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact.
resultsOverall, 67.2% [64.9 - 69.4] of mothers practised skin-to-skin contact. Delivery by caesarean section was associated with a decreased likelihood of mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.04; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.06). Higher birth order (fifth or more) (aOR = 2.34, 95%CI: 1.13, 4.84) was significantly associated with increased odds of skin-to-skin contact. Women who had eight or more antenatal care visits were more likely to engage in skin-to-skin contact (aOR = 1.82; 95% CI: 1.04-3.21) than those with fewer than four visits. Women who delivered in a healthcare facility were more likely to practise skin-to-skin contact (aOR = 30.67; 95% CI: 18.93, 49.70) than those who delivered at home. Compared to women in the Western region, those in the Eastern (aOR = 2.85, 95%CI: 1.21, 6.73), Western North (aOR = 3.87, 95%CI: 1.60, 9.37), Ahafo (aOR = 3.09, 95%CI: 1.19, 8.02), North East (aOR = 4.44, 95%CI: 1.88, 10.50), Upper East (aOR = 3.67, 95%CI: 1.45, 9.31), and Upper West regions (aOR = 6.13, 95%CI: 2.33, 16.16) were more likely to practise skin-to-skin contact.
conclusionOur study has shown moderate mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact practise in Ghana, with significant regional variations. Going forward, any initiatives by the Ghana Health Service, the Ministry of Health, or other organisations focused on maternal and neonatal health must consider the geographical context of their efforts and programme implementation. Enhancing skin-to-skin contact requires increased advocacy and health education during antenatal care sessions, alongside higher attendance at such visits. Additionally, advocating for hospital births and reducing the number of home births is likely to boost skin-to-skin contact practices in Ghana.
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.