ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Folic acid utilization and associated factors among pregnant women who attended public health facilities of illuababor zone, Southwest Ethiopia.
Article in Women's health (London, England). 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundThe protective period is the ideal time for folic acid supplementation to prevent neural tube defects. It supplements at least one month before conception up to three months after conception. World health organization recommends 0.4 mg daily for women from preconception through the first trimester, yet utilization remains challenged.ObjectiveTo assess protective folic acid utilization and associated factors among women attending antenatal care units in Illuababor Zone public facilities.DesignInstitutional based cross-sectional study was conducted.MethodsThis study was conducted among 714 pregnant women attending antenatal care units in public health facilities of the Illuababor zone, selected through a systematic random sampling technique. The data were collected using a semi-structured interviewer-administered questionnaire. Bi-variate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were undertaken, and the association was declared at 95 CI and p-value less than 0.05.ResultsA total of 714 pregnant women participated in the study, resulting in a 97.4% response rate. Only 119 (17%), [95% CI: (14.0, 19.6)] women had utilized protective folic acid. Residence (AOR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.38, 3.40), history of family planning utilization (AOR: 2.65, 95% CI: 1.23, 5.71), gravida (AOR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.17, 3.64), gestational age of antenatal care booking (AOR: 8.77, 95% CI: 5.33, 14.45), and knowledge about folic acid (AOR: 2.99, 95% CI: 1.90, 4.71) were identified as significant predictors of folic acid utilization.ConclusionsFolic acid utilization in the protective period stands at just 17%. Key positive predictors are urban residence, prior family planning use, primigravida status, early first-trimester ANC booking, and strong knowledge of folic acid. Enhancing uptake demands multifaceted strategies addressing knowledge gaps and rural access barriers through targeted education and healthcare services.
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.