SynthesisBMC public health2026
Online-based antenatal education and its effects on maternal mental health and selected neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2026. 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
backgroundOnline antenatal education is increasingly used to improve maternal psychological outcomes and preparedness for childbirth. However, evidence regarding its effectiveness remains inconsistent, particularly due to heterogeneity in intervention types and outcome measures.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 2026. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies evaluating digital antenatal interventions in pregnant women were included. Outcomes included maternal depression, anxiety, fear of childbirth, self-efficacy, and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) incidence. Random-effects models were used, and standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics.
resultsTwelve studies involving 4,982 participants were included. No significant effects were observed for depression (SMD = - 0.18; 95% CI: -0.45 to 0.09; I² = 86.5%; p = 0.188), anxiety (SMD = - 0.10; 95% CI: -0.66 to 0.46; I² = 92.8%; p = 0.723), or self-efficacy (SMD = 0.56; 95% CI: -0.11 to 1.23; I² = 90.6%; p = 0.102). A reduction in fear of childbirth did not reach statistical significance (SMD = - 0.53; 95% CI: -1.06 to 0.003; p = 0.051. No significant association was found for SGA (OR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.17-3.14; p = 0.670). Substantial heterogeneity was present across outcomes, limiting the interpretability of pooled estimates.
conclusionCurrent evidence, characterized by substantial heterogeneity, does not demonstrate statistically significant effects of online-based antenatal education on maternal depression, anxiety, or fear, nor on improving self-efficacy or preventing SGA infants. However, the high heterogeneity (I² >85% for most outcomes) indicates that these pooled estimates are exploratory, and clinically meaningful effects for specific intervention types cannot be ruled out. Findings should be interpreted cautiously.
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.