Literature DB >> 31775899

Mapping evidence of free maternal healthcare financing and quality of care in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic scoping review protocol.

Monica Ansu-Mensah1, Tahiru Mohammed1, Roseline H Udoh1, Vitalis Bawontuo1,2, Desmond Kuupiel3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Identifying and addressing research gaps on the implementation of free maternal healthcare financing policies and the quality of service delivery in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is essential in ensuring continuous patronage of the services by clients and sustainability of the policies to meet the intended goals. The proposed scoping review is aimed at mapping evidence on free maternal healthcare financing and quality of care in SSA.
METHODS: Arksey and O'Malley's framework, Levac and colleagues' recommendations, and the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines will be used to guide the proposed study. A complete keyword search for relevant studies presenting evidence on free maternal healthcare financing and perceived quality of care among women in SSA will be performed in EBSCOhost, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and SCOPUS. Relevant grey literature from university repositories and international organisations such as WHO and government websites, and the reference lists of included studies will be additionally searched. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis: Extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) will be used to present the results of the proposed scoping review. NVivo version 11 software package will be employed to extract the relevant outcomes from the included studies using content thematic analysis. Quality appraisal of the included studies for this proposed study will be performed utilising the latest mixed methods appraisal tool. DISCUSSION: It is anticipated that the results of the proposed study will inform future research and reveal evidence-based information to address potential quality of care issues that may arise because of free maternal healthcare policy implementation in some SSA countries. The proposed study will also be useful to other SSA countries planning to implement free maternal health policy, as they will be able to draw useful lessons to guide them through the process.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Maternal healthcare; free maternal healthcare; health financing; quality of care; sub-Saharan Africa

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31775899      PMCID: PMC6882201          DOI: 10.1186/s12961-019-0495-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst        ISSN: 1478-4505


Background

Reducing maternal and child mortality remains a global challenge. This challenge received much attention during the launch of the Millennium Development Goals in the year 2000 by the United Nations and partners such as WHO [1-5]. It is estimated that 99% of all maternal-related deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries, of which most (66%) are located in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) [5-8]. Maternal mortality in SSA is 1 in 39 live births, whereas it is 1 in 3800 live births in high-income countries [9, 10], 1 in every 130 live births in Oceania, and 1 in every 160 live births Southern Asia [5-8]. Therefore, increasing access to quality maternal healthcare services in SSA has been a global priority since the inception of the Millennium Development Goals to date. To improve access to maternal healthcare services for all women, particularly the poor, various health financing policies, such as free maternal healthcare schemes, aimed at removing financial barriers have been adopted and implemented by some SSA countries. Most of these free maternal healthcare policies cover the WHO’s priority interventions such as antenatal care, delivery and postnatal care, which are recognised by WHO as essential for improving maternal health outcomes [1, 11]. For instance, with the intervention of antenatal care [11] , every pregnant woman is supposed to visit the care provider at least four times during pregnancy for services such as health education, counselling, screening and testing, and treatment, where necessary, with the aim of promoting the health status of both mother and child [9]. Although these free maternal healthcare policies have improved access to healthcare, particularly for pregnant women who are in the low-income brackets, the quality of the service delivery is essential to achieve the aim of the policy [1, 9, 11]. The quality of maternal healthcare services rendered at the various health facilities is particularly crucial to facilitating continuous utilisation of the services by clients, thereby ensuring the desired maternal health outcomes [12-16]. Therefore, the proposed scoping review is aimed at mapping evidence on free maternal healthcare financing and quality of care in SSA focusing on clients, healthcare providers or healthcare professionals, and healthcare managers’ perspectives. We anticipate that the results of this scoping review will reveal useful evidence-based information and identify gaps for future studies to improve maternal healthcare delivery in SSA. We also anticipate that the study findings may influence policy decisions to improve the quality of care as well as contribute to the achievement of United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3.1, which stipulates that a maternal mortality of less than 70 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births should be achieved by 2030 [17].

Methods

Overview

Scoping reviews are considered useful in representing series of literature that exists around a subject of interest and helps to focus the research questions by registering existing research findings and identifying research gaps [4]. A scoping methodology is also considered a useful approach for determining the basic and value of follow-up of a primary study or a full systematic review [5]. Based on this, the current scoping review will be guided by the enhanced version of Arksey and O’Malley’s framework [18], Levac et al.’s recommendations [19] and the 2015 Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines [20] as well as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P) (Additional file 1). The framework involves the following: identifying the research question; identifying relevant studies; study selection; charting the data; and collating, summarising and reporting results [18].

Identifying the research question

Our research question is: What is the evidence on free maternal healthcare financing and quality of maternal healthcare in SSA? The sub-review questions will be as follows: What is the perspective of clients on the quality of care provided under the free maternal healthcare policy in SSA? What is the perspective of healthcare providers on the quality of care provided under the free maternal healthcare policy in SSA? What is the perspective of healthcare managers on the quality of care provided under the free maternal healthcare policy in SSA? The Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) mnemonic [20] used to determine the eligibility of the primary research question for the proposed scoping review is shown in Table 1.
Table 1

PCC (Population, Concept, and Context pneumonic) framework for defining the eligibility of the primary question for the scoping review

P-PopulationQualitative, quantitative or mixed methods studies involving free maternal healthcare financing policies: we defined free maternal healthcare policy as any insurance scheme that seeks to eliminate financial barriers associated with the use of maternal and child healthcare services by pregnant and post-natal mothers
C-ConceptQuality of care: quality of maternal healthcare is defined based on client, healthcare provider and health manager perspectives
C-ContextSub-Saharan Africa: In this study, sub-Saharan Africa will refer to all countries in the WHO African Region [21]
PCC (Population, Concept, and Context pneumonic) framework for defining the eligibility of the primary question for the scoping review

Identify relevant studies

We will conduct a thorough and complete search of numerous bibliographic databases to include all relevant studies on free maternal healthcare policies and the quality of healthcare delivery in SSA irrespective of publication standing whether published, unpublished or in press. A full search will be conducted in EBSCOhost, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and SCOPUS for relevant studies. Relevant grey literature from university repositories and international organisations such as WHO and government websites will also be searched. We will additionally explore the reference lists of all included studies for relevant studies. We will use a combination of the following keywords to search for relevant studies from the electronic databases: ‘free maternal healthcare’ ‘healthcare financing’ ‘health insurance scheme’ ‘maternal healthcare’ ‘quality of care’. We will use Boolean terms ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ to separate keywords. We will also include appropriate Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords to identify relevant studies. Study designs will be limited to only qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods studies and the search language limited to English due to a lack of expertise to interpret other languages. However, date of publication limitations will be removed. Table 2 shows a pilot search conducted in PubMed demonstrating the possibility of conducting the proposed scoping review.
Table 2

Pilot search in PubMed electronic database

DateDatabaseKeywordsSearch results
31/08/2019PubMed

• Line 1: “free maternal healthcare”[All Fields] OR “free healthcare financing”[MeSH Terms] AND

• Line 2: “mothers”[MeSH Terms] OR “expectant mothers”[All Fields] OR

• Line 3: “pregnant”[All Fields] OR “Pregnancy”[MeSH Terms] OR “post-natal”[All Fields] OR

• Line 4: “women”[All Fields] OR “woman”[All Fields] AND “quality”[All Fields] OR

• Line 5: “quality of health care”[MeSH Terms] OR “quality of maternal healthcare”[All Fields] OR

• Line 6: “quality of care”[All Fields] OR “quality of maternal health service”[All Fields] OR

• “quality of maternal health delivery”[All Fields] AND

• Line 7: “Africa”[All Fields] OR “sub Saharan Africa”[All Fields]

• Line 8: “humans”[MeSH Terms]

64,193
Pilot search in PubMed electronic database • Line 1: “free maternal healthcare”[All Fields] OR “free healthcare financing”[MeSH Terms] AND • Line 2: “mothers”[MeSH Terms] OR “expectant mothers”[All Fields] OR • Line 3: “pregnant”[All Fields] OR “Pregnancy”[MeSH Terms] OR “post-natal”[All Fields] OR • Line 4: “women”[All Fields] OR “woman”[All Fields] AND “quality”[All Fields] OR • Line 5: “quality of health care”[MeSH Terms] OR “quality of maternal healthcare”[All Fields] OR • Line 6: “quality of care”[All Fields] OR “quality of maternal health service”[All Fields] OR • “quality of maternal health delivery”[All Fields] AND • Line 7: “Africa”[All Fields] OR “sub Saharan Africa”[All Fields] • Line 8: “humans”[MeSH Terms]

Eligibility criteria and study selection

To ensure the selection of relevant studies for this review, the study selection will be guided by the eligibility criteria as specified under the inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Inclusion criteria

We will include studies that meet the following criteria: Evidence of the study conducted in SSA Studies presenting evidence of free maternal healthcare policy Studies reporting evidence on quality of maternal healthcare services Primary studies

Exclusion criteria

This study will exclude the following: Studies conducted in countries not included in the WHO African Region Studies targeting women of fertility age Studies reporting evidence on quality of care from the health providers’ perspective Studies reporting evidence on quality of care from the funders’ or representatives of health financing institutions’ perspectives Other types of reviews

Study selection

Screening of relevant studies for inclusion in the proposed scoping review will be conducted in three phases. First, the principal investigator will conduct the title screening of retrievable studies from the online database. All eligible studies will be imported onto an endnote library X7 created for the study. At the second (abstract screening) and third (full-text screening) stages, two reviewers will independently sort the studies into two classifications (‘inclusive’ and ‘exclusive’) using the eligibility criteria. Discrepancies between reviewers’ responses at the abstract screening stage will be resolved through a discussion by the review team until a consensus is reached. However, discrepancies in reviewers’ responses at the full-text screening stage will be resolved by involving a third reviewer. In the situation where a full-text article cannot be found from the databases, assistance would be sought from the Catholic University’s library or the full-text will be requested from the authors via email. Inter-rater agreement (Cohen’s kappa co-efficient (k) statistics) between reviewers’ responses will be calculated along with McNemar’s χ2 statistics using Stata 14 following full-text screening. The search record will also be adequately documented as follows: date of search, database, keywords, number of retrievable studies and number of eligible studies. We will follow an adapted PRISMA [21] to present the screening results of the proposed scoping review, as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1

PRISMA 2009 flow diagram [21]

PRISMA 2009 flow diagram [21]

Charting the data

A data charting form will be developed for extraction of relevant data from the included studies in the scoping review. This form will include the following: author and date, study title, objective/aim of the study, study design, study setting, type of free maternal healthcare policy and perceived quality of care. The data extraction form will be piloted by two independent reviewers using a random sample of 10% of the included studies to ensure consistency and accuracy. The data extraction form will be adjusted as required based on feedback from the two independent reviewers. We will constantly update the data extraction form to enable adequate abstraction of all relevant data to answer the review question.

Collating, summarising and reporting the results

We will extract data related to free maternal health policies and perceived quality of care in SSA using content thematic analysis approach [22]. NVivo version 11 will be employed for the content thematic analysis of the included studies and the findings on free maternal health policies and perceived quality of care in SSA summarised and presented using a narrative approach. Emerging themes will also be reported.

Quality appraisal

To evaluate the quality of the studies that will be included in the proposed scoping review, the Mixed Method Quality Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018 will be used to evaluate the methodological quality of all the studies included. The relevance of the study, study design, adequacy and methodology, data collection, analysis of data, and study findings will be examined using the MMAT tool. The quality assessment will be helpful in reporting the risk of bias of the studies included. The quality of the included studies will be graded by calculating the total percentage quality score as specified by the 2018 MMAT. A percentage quality score ranging from ≤50% will be considered as low quality, 51–75% will be considered as average quality, and 76–100% will be considered as high quality.

Discussions

The proposed scoping review will aim to map evidence on free maternal healthcare financing and quality of care in SSA. Improving the quality of care during pregnancy has many benefits such as improved utilisation of antenatal services [23, 24], early detection of infection and prompt linkage to care [25], and reduction of maternal morbidities and mortalities [7], among others. It is anticipated that the results of the proposed study will inform future research and reveal evidence-based information to address the potential quality of care issues that may arise because of free maternal healthcare policy implementation in some SSA countries. The proposed study will also be useful for other SSA countries planning to implement free healthcare financing schemes for maternal health, helping them to draw useful lessons to guide its implementation. The proposed study will thus contribute to healthcare systems strengthening and improve research on free maternal healthcare financing schemes and the quality of care in SSA.

Conclusion

The results of this systematic scoping review research will help identify gaps useful for future studies, such as systematic reviews, meta-analysis and primary studies, to improve the quality of maternal healthcare delivery services in SSA. Additional file 1. PRISMA-P checklist.
  18 in total

1.  The Millennium Project: a plan for meeting the Millennium Development Goals.

Authors:  J D Sachs; J W McArthur
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Jan 22-28       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-07-20       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Determinants of utilization of services under MMJSSA scheme in Jharkhand 'Client Perspective': a qualitative study in a low performing state of India.

Authors:  Sanjay K Rai; Rajib Dasgupta; M K Das; Sarita Singh; Reema Devi; N K Arora
Journal:  Indian J Public Health       Date:  2011 Oct-Dec

4.  Understanding global trends in maternal mortality.

Authors:  Sarah Zureick-Brown; Holly Newby; Doris Chou; Nobuko Mizoguchi; Lale Say; Emi Suzuki; John Wilmoth
Journal:  Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2013-03

5.  Global, regional, and national levels and causes of maternal mortality during 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013.

Authors:  Nicholas J Kassebaum; Amelia Bertozzi-Villa; Megan S Coggeshall; Katya A Shackelford; Caitlyn Steiner; Kyle R Heuton; Diego Gonzalez-Medina; Ryan Barber; Chantal Huynh; Daniel Dicker; Tara Templin; Timothy M Wolock; Ayse Abbasoglu Ozgoren; Foad Abd-Allah; Semaw Ferede Abera; Ibrahim Abubakar; Tom Achoki; Ademola Adelekan; Zanfina Ademi; Arsène Kouablan Adou; José C Adsuar; Emilie E Agardh; Dickens Akena; Deena Alasfoor; Zewdie Aderaw Alemu; Rafael Alfonso-Cristancho; Samia Alhabib; Raghib Ali; Mazin J Al Kahbouri; François Alla; Peter J Allen; Mohammad A AlMazroa; Ubai Alsharif; Elena Alvarez; Nelson Alvis-Guzmán; Adansi A Amankwaa; Azmeraw T Amare; Hassan Amini; Walid Ammar; Carl A T Antonio; Palwasha Anwari; Johan Arnlöv; Valentina S Arsic Arsenijevic; Ali Artaman; Majed Masoud Asad; Rana J Asghar; Reza Assadi; Lydia S Atkins; Alaa Badawi; Kalpana Balakrishnan; Arindam Basu; Sanjay Basu; Justin Beardsley; Neeraj Bedi; Tolesa Bekele; Michelle L Bell; Eduardo Bernabe; Tariku J Beyene; Zulfiqar Bhutta; Aref Bin Abdulhak; Jed D Blore; Berrak Bora Basara; Dipan Bose; Nicholas Breitborde; Rosario Cárdenas; Carlos A Castañeda-Orjuela; Ruben Estanislao Castro; Ferrán Catalá-López; Alanur Cavlin; Jung-Chen Chang; Xuan Che; Costas A Christophi; Sumeet S Chugh; Massimo Cirillo; Samantha M Colquhoun; Leslie Trumbull Cooper; Cyrus Cooper; Iuri da Costa Leite; Lalit Dandona; Rakhi Dandona; Adrian Davis; Anand Dayama; Louisa Degenhardt; Diego De Leo; Borja del Pozo-Cruz; Kebede Deribe; Muluken Dessalegn; Gabrielle A deVeber; Samath D Dharmaratne; Uğur Dilmen; Eric L Ding; Rob E Dorrington; Tim R Driscoll; Sergei Petrovich Ermakov; Alireza Esteghamati; Emerito Jose A Faraon; Farshad Farzadfar; Manuela Mendonca Felicio; Seyed-Mohammad Fereshtehnejad; Graça Maria Ferreira de Lima; Mohammad H Forouzanfar; Elisabeth B França; Lynne Gaffikin; Ketevan Gambashidze; Fortuné Gbètoho Gankpé; Ana C Garcia; Johanna M Geleijnse; Katherine B Gibney; Maurice Giroud; Elizabeth L Glaser; Ketevan Goginashvili; Philimon Gona; Dinorah González-Castell; Atsushi Goto; Hebe N Gouda; Harish Chander Gugnani; Rahul Gupta; Rajeev Gupta; Nima Hafezi-Nejad; Randah Ribhi Hamadeh; Mouhanad Hammami; Graeme J Hankey; Hilda L Harb; Rasmus Havmoeller; Simon I Hay; Ileana B Heredia Pi; Hans W Hoek; H Dean Hosgood; Damian G Hoy; Abdullatif Husseini; Bulat T Idrisov; Kaire Innos; Manami Inoue; Kathryn H Jacobsen; Eiman Jahangir; Sun Ha Jee; Paul N Jensen; Vivekanand Jha; Guohong Jiang; Jost B Jonas; Knud Juel; Edmond Kato Kabagambe; Haidong Kan; Nadim E Karam; André Karch; Corine Kakizi Karema; Anil Kaul; Norito Kawakami; Konstantin Kazanjan; Dhruv S Kazi; Andrew H Kemp; Andre Pascal Kengne; Maia Kereselidze; Yousef Saleh Khader; Shams Eldin Ali Hassan Khalifa; Ejaz Ahmed Khan; Young-Ho Khang; Luke Knibbs; Yoshihiro Kokubo; Soewarta Kosen; Barthelemy Kuate Defo; Chanda Kulkarni; Veena S Kulkarni; G Anil Kumar; Kaushalendra Kumar; Ravi B Kumar; Gene Kwan; Taavi Lai; Ratilal Lalloo; Hilton Lam; Van C Lansingh; Anders Larsson; Jong-Tae Lee; James Leigh; Mall Leinsalu; Ricky Leung; Xiaohong Li; Yichong Li; Yongmei Li; Juan Liang; Xiaofeng Liang; Stephen S Lim; Hsien-Ho Lin; Steven E Lipshultz; Shiwei Liu; Yang Liu; Belinda K Lloyd; Stephanie J London; Paulo A Lotufo; Jixiang Ma; Stefan Ma; Vasco Manuel Pedro Machado; Nana Kwaku Mainoo; Marek Majdan; Christopher Chabila Mapoma; Wagner Marcenes; Melvin Barrientos Marzan; Amanda J Mason-Jones; Man Mohan Mehndiratta; Fabiola Mejia-Rodriguez; Ziad A Memish; Walter Mendoza; Ted R Miller; Edward J Mills; Ali H Mokdad; Glen Liddell Mola; Lorenzo Monasta; Jonathan de la Cruz Monis; Julio Cesar Montañez Hernandez; Ami R Moore; Maziar Moradi-Lakeh; Rintaro Mori; Ulrich O Mueller; Mitsuru Mukaigawara; Aliya Naheed; Kovin S Naidoo; Devina Nand; Vinay Nangia; Denis Nash; Chakib Nejjari; Robert G Nelson; Sudan Prasad Neupane; Charles R Newton; Marie Ng; Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen; Muhammad Imran Nisar; Sandra Nolte; Ole F Norheim; Luke Nyakarahuka; In-Hwan Oh; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Bolajoko O Olusanya; Saad B Omer; John Nelson Opio; Orish Ebere Orisakwe; Jeyaraj D Pandian; Christina Papachristou; Jae-Hyun Park; Angel J Paternina Caicedo; Scott B Patten; Vinod K Paul; Boris Igor Pavlin; Neil Pearce; David M Pereira; Konrad Pesudovs; Max Petzold; Dan Poenaru; Guilherme V Polanczyk; Suzanne Polinder; Dan Pope; Farshad Pourmalek; Dima Qato; D Alex Quistberg; Anwar Rafay; Kazem Rahimi; Vafa Rahimi-Movaghar; Sajjad ur Rahman; Murugesan Raju; Saleem M Rana; Amany Refaat; Luca Ronfani; Nobhojit Roy; Tania Georgina Sánchez Pimienta; Mohammad Ali Sahraian; Joshua A Salomon; Uchechukwu Sampson; Itamar S Santos; Monika Sawhney; Felix Sayinzoga; Ione J C Schneider; Austin Schumacher; David C Schwebel; Soraya Seedat; Sadaf G Sepanlou; Edson E Servan-Mori; Marina Shakh-Nazarova; Sara Sheikhbahaei; Kenji Shibuya; Hwashin Hyun Shin; Ivy Shiue; Inga Dora Sigfusdottir; Donald H Silberberg; Andrea P Silva; Jasvinder A Singh; Vegard Skirbekk; Karen Sliwa; Sergey S Soshnikov; Luciano A Sposato; Chandrashekhar T Sreeramareddy; Konstantinos Stroumpoulis; Lela Sturua; Bryan L Sykes; Karen M Tabb; Roberto Tchio Talongwa; Feng Tan; Carolina Maria Teixeira; Eric Yeboah Tenkorang; Abdullah Sulieman Terkawi; Andrew L Thorne-Lyman; David L Tirschwell; Jeffrey A Towbin; Bach X Tran; Miltiadis Tsilimbaris; Uche S Uchendu; Kingsley N Ukwaja; Eduardo A Undurraga; Selen Begüm Uzun; Andrew J Vallely; Coen H van Gool; Tommi J Vasankari; Monica S Vavilala; N Venketasubramanian; Salvador Villalpando; Francesco S Violante; Vasiliy Victorovich Vlassov; Theo Vos; Stephen Waller; Haidong Wang; Linhong Wang; XiaoRong Wang; Yanping Wang; Scott Weichenthal; Elisabete Weiderpass; Robert G Weintraub; Ronny Westerman; James D Wilkinson; Solomon Meseret Woldeyohannes; John Q Wong; Muluemebet Abera Wordofa; Gelin Xu; Yang C Yang; Yuichiro Yano; Gokalp Kadri Yentur; Paul Yip; Naohiro Yonemoto; Seok-Jun Yoon; Mustafa Z Younis; Chuanhua Yu; Kim Yun Jin; Maysaa El Sayed Zaki; Yong Zhao; Yingfeng Zheng; Maigeng Zhou; Jun Zhu; Xiao Nong Zou; Alan D Lopez; Mohsen Naghavi; Christopher J L Murray; Rafael Lozano
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Determinants of use of supervised delivery care under Ghana's fee exemption policy for maternal healthcare: the case of the Central Region.

Authors:  Henrietta Asante-Sarpong; Adobea Yaa Owusu; Sheela Saravanan; Ernest Appiah; Mumuni Abu
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Accessibility of pregnancy-related point-of-care diagnostic tests for maternal healthcare in rural primary healthcare facilities in Northern Ghana: A cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Desmond Kuupiel; Boikhutso Tlou; Vitalis Bawontuo; Tivani P Mashamba-Thompson
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-02-19

8.  Quality of maternal healthcare in India: Has the National Rural Health Mission made a difference?

Authors:  Harish Nair; Rajmohan Panda
Journal:  J Glob Health       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.413

9.  Determinants of stillbirths in Ghana: does quality of antenatal care matter?

Authors:  Patience A Afulani
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Women's perspectives on quality of maternal health care services in Malawi.

Authors:  Kennedy Machira; Martin Palamuleni
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2018-01-09
View more
  3 in total

1.  The effect of the capitation policy withdrawal on maternal health service provision in Ashanti Region, Ghana: an interrupted time series analysis.

Authors:  John Kanyiri Yambah; Kofi Akohene Mensah; Naasegnibe Kuunibe; Kindness Laar; Roger Ayimbillah Atinga; Millicent Ofori Boateng; Daniel Opoku; Wilm Quentin
Journal:  Glob Health Res Policy       Date:  2022-10-21

2.  Quality of care in the free maternal healthcare era in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review of providers' and managers' perceptions.

Authors:  Monica Ansu-Mensah; Frederick Inkum Danquah; Vitalis Bawontuo; Peter Ansu-Mensah; Tahiru Mohammed; Roseline H Udoh; Desmond Kuupiel
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2021-03-19       Impact factor: 3.007

3.  Spatial patterns and inequalities in skilled birth attendance and caesarean delivery in sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Firew Tekle Bobo; Augustine Asante; Mirkuzie Woldie; Angela Dawson; Andrew Hayen
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2021-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.