MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3012368533 · doi:10.1186/s12884-020-2856-8

Herbal medicine use and predictors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3012368533 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fentahun Adane, Girma Seyoum, Yoseph Merkeb Alamneh, Worku Abie, Melaku Desta, Bihonegn Sisay

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCollege of Nursing, University of SaskatchewanDebre Markos University
KeywordsMedicineReproductive medicineMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryMEDLINEPregnancyFamily medicineTraditional medicineAlternative medicineSystematic reviewObstetricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of herbal medicine among pregnant women is increasing in many low- and high-income countries due to their cost-effectiveness in treatment and ease of access. Research findings across Ethiopia on the prevalence and predictors of herbal medicine use among pregnant women attending antenatal care are highly variable and inconsistent. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to estimate the overall prevalence of the use of herbal medicine and its predictors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Ethiopia. METHOD: tests were used to assess heterogeneity. A random effect meta-analysis model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence. In addition, the association between risk factors and herbal medicine use in pregnant women attending antenatal care were examined. RESULTS: A total of eight studies were included in this review. The pooled prevalence of herbal medicine use among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Ethiopia was 47.77% (95% CI: 28.00-67.55). Subgroup analysis by geographic regions has showed that the highest prevalence (57.49%;95% CI: 53.14, 61.85) was observed in Oromia Region and the lowest prevalence was observed in Addis Ababa (31.39%; 95% CI: 2.83, 79.96). The herbal medicines commonly consumed by women during pregnancy were ginger: 41.11% (95% CI: 25.90, 56.32), damakasse: 34.63% (95% CI: 17.68, 51.58), garlic: 32.98% (95% CI: 22.21, 43.76), tenaadam: 19.59% (95% CI: 7.54, 31.63) and eucalyptus: 4.71% (95% CI: 1.1, 8.26). Mothers' previous history of self-medication (95% CI: 1.91, 51.35), illness during pregnancy (95% CI: 1.56, 23.91), employment status (95% CI: 3.89, 10.89), educational status (95% CI: 1.52, 2.68), and place of residence (95% CI: 1.86, 3.23) were predictors of herbal medicine use by women during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: In this study, about half of women attending antenatal care use herbal medicine and it is relatively high. The most commonly consumed herbal medicine during pregnancy was ginger followed by damakasse, garlic, tenaadam and eucalyptus. During pregnancy, it is not known that these most commonly consumed plant species have harmful fetal effects. However, many of the medicinal plant species are poorly studied, and it is not possible to rule out teratogenic effects. Teamwork between healthcare professionals and traditional practitioners to educate on the use of medicinal plants will encourage healthier pregnancies and better health for mothers and infants.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.027
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth→Same topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies→French-language works237,207→